^  ^J        THE  FAEMER  AND  THE  TARIFF. 


SPEECH 


/ 


HOK  J.  :j^.  dolph, 


OF    OREGON, 


SENATE  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES, 


Si-TTJEDAY,  March  29,  1890. 


WASHINGTON. 
1890. 


1 


UCSB  LfBRARY 


SPEECH 

OP 

HON.    JOSEPH   N.    DOLPH. 


The  Senate  baying:  under  consideration  the  resolution  submitted  by  the  Sen- 
ator from  Indiana  [Mr.  Yoobhbbs]  in  regard  to  the  depression  of  agricultural 
interests — 

Mr.  DOLPH  said: 

Mr.  Peesident:  The  Eepublican  party  was  restored  to  power  at 
the  last  Presidential  election  on  account  of  its  position  upon  the 
tariff.  It  is  pledged  to  a  reduction  of  the  revenues  to  an  amount 
sufficient  only  to  meet  the  necessities  of  the  Government,  but  in  such 
a  manner  as  to  insure  the  welfare  of  American  industries.  The  issue 
was  squarely  made  between  the  protective  system  and  tariff  for  reve- 
nue only;  between  the  Mills  bill,  which  had  passed  the  House  and 
was  the  embodiment  of  the  theories  of  Mr.  Cleveland  and  the  free-trad- 
ers— for  tariff  for  revenue  only  is  nothing  but  free  trade — so  far  as  was 
practicable  for  the  Democratic  House,  with  so  many  local  interests, 
some  of  them  demanding  protection,  to  embody  those  theories  into  a 
bill,  and  the  Senate  bill,  which  was  framed  with  the  view  to  secure  the 
necessary  reduction  of  the  revenue  without  injury  to  the  industries  of 
the  country  or  abandoning  the  policy  of  protection  to  American  labor 
and  American  qapital. 

The  people  decided  for  the  national  policy  of  protection,  that  the 
present  tariff  policy  should  be  continued,  and  that  whatever  revision 
of  the  tariff  was  required  should  be  made  by  its  friends.  It  only  re- 
mains for  the  dominant  party  in  Congress  to  execute  the  will  of  the 
people  and  redeem  its  pledges.  This  it  is  proceeding  to  do  with  all 
possible  dispatch  considering  the  magnitude  and  intricacies  of  the  sub- 
ject, and  before  the  present  session  of  Congress  adjourns  it  is  safe  to  say 
that  some  measure  not  greatly  dissimilar  to  the  Senate  bill  of  last  ses- 
sion will  become  a  law. 

As  was  to  have  been  expected,  the  Democratic  party  has  not  profited 
by  defeat.  The  attitude  of  the  two  political  parties  towards  the  tariff 
question  has  not  changed.  The  contest  is  to  be  fought  over  again  on 
the  same  lines  and  with  the  same  old  arguments  used  by  them  in  the 
last  Congress  and  in  the  Presidential  campaign.  The  Mills  bill,  or  a 
measure  substantially  like  it,  is  to  be  the  proposition  of  the  Democratic 
party,  with  which  the  measure  of  the  majority  is  to  be  antagonized. 

The  Democratic  policy  at  the  present  session  of  Congress,  as  it  was 
at  the  last,  is  to  continue  heavy  protection  to  Louisiana  sugar,  and  to 
place  wool,  lumber,  salt,  and  vegetables  and  other  farm  products,  and 
the  products  of  the  mines  and  raw  material  generally  on  the  free-list. 

Having  put  their  hands  to  the  plow  in  this  matter,  the  Democratic 
leaders  will  not  turn  back.     Having  been  committed  by  President 


CleTeland  to  free  trade,  there  is  no  retreat.  Qis  free-trade  message  waa 
the  Rubicon,  which  once  crossed  was  crossed  forever.  Recognizing  thia 
the  Democratic  leaders,  aided  by  the  Cobden  Club,  are  making  her- 
culean efforts  to  propagate  free-trade  theories.  Taking  advantage  of 
the  overproduction  of  com  and  th«  low  price  of  farm  products  in  the 
Western  States,  they  are  industriously  seeking  to  convince  the  farmers 
of  those  States  that  the  depression  of  the  farming  industry  is  caused 
by  the  protective  system,  and  to  array  them  against  the  other  indus- 
tries of  the  country.  Tons  of  free-trade  literature  are  being  circulated 
among  them,  and  it  is  hoped  and  apparently  believed  by  the  Demo- 
cratic leaders  that,  aided  by  the  discontent  which  naturally  prevails  in 
times  of  business  depression,  Republican  farmers  can  be  brought  to 
adopt  the  Democratic  theory  of  the  tariff,  or  at  least  be  induced  to  try 
a  change. 

In  accordance  with  this  general  policy,  the  senior  Senator  from  Indi- 
ana a  few  days  ago  made  a  speech,  intended  no  doubt  to  have  a  wide 
circulation,  embellished  with  brilliant  rhetoric  and  glittering  general- 
ities, in  which  his  imagination  was  drawn  upon,  more  than  facts,  to 
show  that  the  present  depressed  condition  of  the  farming  interests  was 
due  to  the  protective  policy,  and  to  endeavor  to  turn  the  present  dis- 
content to  the  advantage  of  the  Democratic  party. 

I  do  not  propose  to  answer  his  speech,  but  in  my  humble  way  to  at- 
tempt to  show  that  the  protective  tariff  has  in  no  degree  contributed  to 
the  depression,  that  the  present  condition  of  the  farmer  is  far  more 
prosperous  than  it  would  have  been  under  a  system  of  tariff  for  reve- 
nue only,  more  prosperous  than  it  ever  has  been  in  this  country  when 
the  principle  of  protection  was  abandoned,  and  is  far  better  than  the 
condition  of  the  farmer  in  any  free-trade  country  in  the  world. 

I  listened,  in  entire  accord  with  him,  to  his  eloquent  laudation  of  the 
farmer.  Agriculture  in  some  form  is  the  oldest  of  the  occupations  of 
man,  and  is  still  the  most  important  There  are  probably  more  persons 
engaged  directly  in  farming  and  dependent  upon  the  earnings  of  the 
farmer  than  are  engaged  in  or  dependent  upon  all  the  other  industries 
of  the  country.  I  hope  I  shall  be  credited  with  equal  sincerity  A,vith 
him  when  I  say  that  all  laws,  whether  State  or  national,  ought  to  be 
so  framed  as  to  promote  the  interests  of  the  farmer  in  common  with  the 
interests  of  all  other  citizens  engaged  in  honorable  and  useful  occupa- 
tions, and  so  as  to  prevent  ail  combinations,  monopolies,  and  specula- 
tions which  have  a  tendency  to  control  the  supply  of  and  demand  for 
farm  products;  that  whenever  any  existing  law  can  be  shown  to  operate 
unjustly  upon  any  class  of  citizens  I  will  be  as  ready  to  vote  for  its  re- 
peal as  he;  and  that  whenever  any  measure  is  proposed  which  in  my 
judgment  is  calculated  to  benefit  the  farmers  of  this  country,  without 
injustice  to  other  equally  deserving  classes,  my  voice  and  my  vote  will 
be  found  in  favor  of  that  measure. 

Every  impulse  of  my  nature  is  in  full  sympathy  with  the  men  who 
till  the  soil  and  labor  with  their  hands  iu  every  useful  occupation. 
Labor  is  honorable  and  the  source  of  all  wealth.  Idleness  is  a  curse  to 
the  individual  and  the  community.  I  first  saw  the  light  on  a  farm  and 
from  necessity  pa^ed  through  an  experience  which  has  made  me  familiar 
with  all  phases  of  farm  life.  But  when  we  come  to  discuss  the  remedies 
proposed  for  the  existing  depression  of  the  agricultural  interests,  the 
Senator  and  myself,  on  some  of  them,  are  as  far  apart  as  the  poles.  He 
would  endeavor  to  array  the  farmer  against  all  other  clasas  of  producers, 
while  I  believe  that  th»  interests  of  the  farmer  are  intimately  connected 


with  the  weal  of  every  other  producing  class,  and  that  the  adjustment  ia 
so  delicate  and  sensitive  that  a  blow  to  one  injures  the  whole.  If  the 
manufacturers  are  not  prosperous,  farming  languishes;  if  farming  is 
not  prosperous,  manufactures  are  depressed.  In  fact,  the  surest  way  to 
destroy  the  farmer  would  be  to  first  destroy  the  manufactures,  which 
would  destroy  the  home  market  for  farm  products  and  drive  the  opera- 
tives to  the  cultivation  of  the  soil  and  to  competition  with  the  present 
farming  class. 

Employment,  not  cheapness,  is  the  true  basis  of  all  national  pros- 
perity. The  way  to  make  a  nation  prosperous  and  the  people  happy 
and  contented  is  to  give  every  one  an  opportunity  of  being  employed. 
The  measure  of  our  prosperity  as  a  nation  is  the  value  of  the  fruits  of 
labor,  of  the  wool  we  grow,  the  cattle  and  horses,  the  wheat  and  corn, 
uid  other  agricultural  products  we  raise,  of  the  articles  we  manulac- 
tnre,  and  of  the  useful  and  precious  metals  we  mine.  When  all  our 
diversified  industries  are  profitably  carried  on  together,  when  the  soil, 
the  mine§,  and  the  forests  are  all  laid  under  contribution  to  add  to  our 
wealth,  when  the  hill-sides,  which  are  not  well  adapted  to  cultivation, 
are  profitably  devoted  to  the  raising  of  sheep,  when  the  cattle  industry 
la  fairly  remunerative,  when  wheat  and  corn  bring  a  fair  price,  when 
there  is  a  demand  for  the  products  of  our  mills  and  our  factories  which 
keeps  them  in  operation,  every  one  is  prosperous;  ^nd  individual  pros- 
perity makes  a  prosperous  whole. 

Rut  let  the  price  of  ^^•ool  be  low,  lot  there  be  a  partial  failure  of  the 
wheat  crop,  or,  as  no^  is  the  case,  the  corn  crop  be  in  excess  of  the 
demand,  or  the  factories  and  mills  compelled  to  shut  down,  and  pros- 
perity is  at  once  checked,  other  industries  suffer,  and  hard  times  are 
threatened.  Let  no  one  suppose  for  a  moment  that  one  class,  or  the  class 
interested  in  one  industry,  is  not  interested  in  all  the  others.  All  are 
intimately  connected.  The  destruction  of  the  wool  industry  and  the 
throwing  of  several  thousand  men  out  of  employment  would  be  an  in- 
jury to  every  man,  woman,  and  child  in  the  United  States.  The  man 
thrown  out  of  employment  by  the  destruction  of  that  industry  would 
be  obliged  to  crowd  into  some  other.  The  lands  now  profitably  usetl 
for  grazing  purposes  would  many  of  them  be  idle  and  unproductive. 

Whatever  hurts  Maine  hurts  Texas,  and  what  hurts  Massachusetts 
hurts  Oregon.  The  people  of  the  entire  Union  are  interested  in  the  pros- 
perity of  every  part.  Massachusetts  manufactures  Oregon  wool,  but  to  do 
so  she  buys  the  wool  and  helps  to  make  a  home  market  for  it,  and  she 
also  buys  the  food  products  of  other  States  to  feed  the  operatives  in  her 
factories  and  her  mills.  The  Senator  from  Indiana  and  the  party  to  which 
he  belongs  two  years  ago  thought  they  could  single  out  and  strike  down 
the  wool  industry;  but  the  people  of  this  country  understood  that  one 
industry  could  not  be  stricken  down  without  injury  to  all  the  rest,  and 
they  made  common  cause  with  the  wool-grower. 

THE   PEICK   OF  CORN  AND  WHEAT. 

The  low  prices  of  corn  and  wheat  in  the  West  are  producing  a  de- 
pression of  agricultural  interests  in  the  principal  corn  and  wheat-grow- 
ing States.  The  advocates  of  free  trade  charge  that  the  fall  in  prices 
is  caused  by  the  protective  system;  but  fortunately  the  cause  for  the 
decline  in  prices  is  neither  obscure  nor  difficult  to  understand.  The 
price  of  corn  is  fixed  by  the  same  law  that  fixes  the  prices  of  all  other 
commodities:  the  law  of  supply  and  demand,  in  connection  with  the 
cost  of  transportation  from  the  States  of  production  to  the  places  of 
consumption.    But  the  free  operation  of  this  law  is  often  interrupted  by 


6 

eombinations  of  middle-men.  The  States  which  produce  a  surplus 
of  com,  and  therefore  are  sources  of  commercial  supply,  are  Ohio,  In- 
diana, Illinois,  Iowa,  Missouri,  Kansas,  and  Nebraska.  Owing  largely 
to  climatic  causes,  the  crop  of  com  last  year  was  the  largest  ever  pro- 
duced in  the  United  States  and  the  largest  in  the  rate  of  yield  since 
1880.  From  a  table  contained  in  a  report  of  the  statistician  of  the 
Agricultural  Department,  issued  in  March  of  this  year,  I  extract  the 
following: 

The  production  of  com  in  1887  was  1,456,000,000  bushels;  in  1888, 
1,988,000,000  bushels;  in  1889,  2, 113, 000, 000 bushels;  showing  a  very 
large  increase  of  the  crop  during  the  last  two  years,  and  that  it  has  now 
reached  the  surprising  proportions  of  over  2, 000, 000, 000  bushels. 

From  the  same  table  I  learn  that  up  to  March  1  of  this  year  there 
had  been  consumed  and  distributed  a  greater  amount,  with  one  excep- 
tion, than  in  any  previous  year  up  to  the  same  period.  The  amount 
consumed  and  distributed  up  to  March  1,  1889,  of  the  crop  of  1888  and 
of  the  surplus  of  previous  years,  was  1,201,000,000  bushels,  and  the 
amount  consumed  up  to  March  1,  1890,  of  the  crop  of  1889  and  of  the 
Burplus  of  previous  years,  was  1,443,000,000  bushels. 

These  figures  show  that  the  demand  and  consumption  have  not  de- 
creased, but  that  the  supply  has  largely  increased,  and  that  the  present 
unmarketable  surplus  and  low  prices  are  caused  by  overproduction, 
and  that  alone.  The  freight  rates  for  the  transportation  of  corn  and 
other  farm  products  are  in  many  cases  too  high,  but  the  rate  of  trans- 
portation is  not  the  cause  of  the  present  low  price  of  com.  When  the 
question  is  examined  it  will  be  found  that  rates  of  transportation  have 
been  from  time  to  time  reduced,  and  that  by  some  transportation  lines, 
notably  the  Union  Pacific,  greatly  reduced,  upon  com  to  meet  the  pres- 
ent emergency;  but  the  situation  has  not  improved,  as  it  could  not  be; 
the  market  has  been  supplied.  There  is  no  legitimate  demand  for  the 
surplus  for  present  consumption,  and  if  bought  at  all,  mnst  be  bought 
by  operators  who  speculate  as  to  the  future  demand  and  therefore  buy  » 
at  their  own  price.  The  home  market  is  the  principal  market;  and 
when  the  production  is  largely  in  excess  of  the  demand  for  home  con- 
sumption a  fall  in  prices  is  inevitable. 

On  a  former  occasion  I  discussed  in  the  Senate  the  cause  of  the  de- 
cline in  the  foreign  market  of  the  price  of  wheat  and  presented  elabo- 
rate tables  to  show  the  value  of  our  exports  and  imports,  the  amount 
of  agricultural  products  exported,  the  amount  of  wheat  and  flour  ex- 
ported through  a  series  of  years,  the  amount  of  the  production  and 
distribution,  the  growth  of  the  production  of  wheat  in  India,  the  ag- 
gregate importation  of  wheat  and  flour  in  Great  Britian  and  the  countries 
from  whence  imported.  The  latter  tables  were  taken  from  the  report 
of  General  Bonham,  consul-general  of  the  United  States  at  Calcutta. 
Beferring  to  these  tables  I  summed  up  the  matter  as  follows: 

The  facts  stated  in  this  report  fully  justify  the  views  of  Judge  Bonham,  that 
India  is  to  become  a  formidable  competitor  with  the  United  States  in  the  wheat 
nuirkets  of  Europe,  and  in  my  judgment  explain  the  cause  of  the  decline  of 
■wheat  In  Europe  in  recent  j'ears.  The  table  showing  the  aggregate  imports  of 
wheat  and  flour  into  the  United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  from 
the  several  countries  named  is  especially  instructive.  It  shows  that  while  th« 
Imports  into  Great  Britain,  although  somewhat  fluctuating,  have  not  materially 
Increased  since  1881-'82,  the  imports  from  Russia  have  increased  from  4,089.303 
centals  in  1881-'82  to  11,986,350  centals  in  1885-'86;  the  imports  from  India  have 
Increased  from  7,337,924  centals  in  lS81-'82  to  12,101,963  centals  in  1885-'86,  and 
th&t  the  imports  from  other  countries,  not  including  the  United  States,  have  in- 
creased from  12.229,230  centals  in  lSSl-'82  to  17,083.501  centals  inl885-'86;  while 
tbe  imports  from  the  United  States  have  decreased  from  43,776,662  cental*  in 


1881-'82  to  36,007,187  centals  In  1885-'86,  and  that  the  export  of  wheat  from  India 
baa  Increased  from  299,385  centals  in  1867-'6S  to  21,060,519  centals  or  35.100,868 
boahela  in  1885-'86,  a  period  of  nineteen  years.  These  figures  show  that  we  ar« 
already  engaged  in  a  ruinous  competition  with  Russia  and  India,  which  must 
eontinne  to  grow  g^reater  as  the  prod  notion  of  wheat  in  those  countries  increase* 
to  crowd  the  American  product  out  of  the  European  markets ;  and  yet  tlie  fre*- 
traders  tell  us  to  let  our  home  markets  go,  buy  our  manufactures  in  England, 
»nd  raise  more  wheat. 

Protection  to  industry  by  creating  a  diversity  of  employment  and  increasing 
the  number  of  those  who  are  not  engaged  in  farming,  but  must  depend  upon 
the  farmer  for  the  means  of  subsistence,  gives  him  a  steady  remunerative  market 
for  breadstuffs  and  creates  a  market  for  crops  which  can  not  be  profitably  ex- 
ported. The  foreign  market  for  our  wheat  is  mainly  created  by  England,  and 
M  growing  every  year  more  uncertain  and  unsatisfactory.  The  amount  of  our 
corn  and  wheat  required  by  England  depends  in  the  first  place  upon  the  crops 
of  Europe,  which  usually  supply  from  two-thirds  to  three-fourths  of  what  i« 
needed;  then  upon  the  yield  in  Russia  and  India;  so  that  the  American  fanner 
first  takes  the  chances  of  his  own  harvest,  and  then  of  a  scarcity  in  Europe,  and 
In  late  years  the  further  chance  of  having  the  price  of  wheat  fixed  by  the  com- 
petition of  Russian  and  Indian  wheat.  And  still  free-traders  assert  that  the  true 
principle  is  to  buy  where  you  can  buy  the  cheapest,  and  say  that  if  our  manu- 
factnring  industries  can  not  successfully  compete  with  cheap  capital,  organized 
industries,  and  pauper  labor  of  England,  our  people  should  turn  their  attention 
to  something  else — that  is,  to  farming— destroy  our  home  markets,  and  lead  our 
farmers  to  depend  upon  a  foreign  market  for  the  sale  of  their  surplus  products. 

They  propose  that  we  shall  increase  our  exports  to  pay  for  our  increased  im- 
ports, and  in  endeavoring  to  do  so  that  our  farmers  shall  enter  the  field  in  com- 
petition ■with  the  miserable  ryots  of  India,  who  live  on  a  lew -cents  a  day.  If 
it  were  proposed  to  import  into  the  United  States  several  millions  of  the  Indian 
ryots  or  of  Chinese  for  agricultural  laborers,  to  enable  us  to  compete  with  India 
in  producing  wheat,  every  white  laborer  in  the  United  States  could  see  that 
American  labor  was  threatened.  How  does  the  case  differ  when  it  is  proposed 
to  drive  several  millions  of  Ameriaan  laborers  from  the  manufactures  into  agri- 
culture and  then  to  force  them  into  competition  with  the  Indian  ryots  by  in- 
creasing our  surplus  wheat  crop,  which  we  will  be  compelled  to  get  rid  of  by 
underselling  Indian  wheat? 

In  the  report  of  the  statistician  of  the  Agricultural  Department,  al- 
ready referred  to,  the  cause  of  the  present  depression  of  agriculture  is 
•dmirably  stated.  Mr.  Dodge  shows  that  the  low  price  of  com  and 
wheat  is  due  to  overproduction ;  that  the  farmers  of  this  country  can 
not  successfully  compete  with  the  wheat-growers  of  India,  Eussia,  and 
other  countries;  that  other  industries  should  be  encouraged  and  main- 
tained in  order  to  create  a  home  market  forfarm  products  and  em- 
ployment for  our  people,  and  that  farmers  should  engage  in  diversified 
farming  and  produce  all  the  products  we  now  import.     He  says: 

AGEICTJLTUBAX  DEPEESSIOS  AND  ITS  CAUSES. 

There  is  almost  universal  complaint  among  farmeraof  all  nations  of  the  prev- 
alence of  low  prices.  The  agricultural  depression  of  Great  Britain  has  proba- 
bly been  more  severe  than  that  of  any  other  nation.  A  potent  cause  in  this  case 
la  the  competition  from  all  parts  of  the  world,  unrelieved  by  any  taxation  of 
Imports.  Prance  and  Germany  are  somewhat  disturbed  by  similar  complaints 
of  unremunerative  rural  industry.  Italy  has  also  had  occasion  to  make  official 
Investigation  of  the  causes  of  agricultural  depression.  Other  countries  are  vo- 
cal with  similar  cries  of  dissatisfaction  w^ith  the  proceeds  of  agricultural  labor. 
So  the  trouble  appears  to  be  general  in  monarchies  and  republics,  whether  th« 
monetary  circulation  is  gold  or  silver  or  paper,  and  under  the  influence  of  vari- 
ous and  diverse  economic  systems. 

Not  all  countries  are  in  the  same  depths  of  distress.  In  ours  farmers  and 
farm  laborers  are  doubtless  better  fed  and  clothed,  able  to  maintain  a  higher 
style  of  living,  and  enjoy  more  of  the  benefits  of  civilization  and  culture  than 
those  of  any  other  country.  It  may  be  said  with  absolute  truth  that  in  thirty 
years  the  scale  of  living  has  advanced  immensely  in  this  country,  not  equally 
Inall  sections,  bnt  manifestly  everywhere.  There  is  a  tendency  to  extravagance 
in  town  life  that  has  been  imitated  in  rural  circles,  and  the  natural  ambition 
for  progress  and  precedence,  when  generally  aroused,  will  express  itself  in  dis- 
satisfaction with  prevailing  conditions  and  a  determination  to  overpower  all 
obstacles  to  advancement.  This  is  a  hopeful  sign.  It  is  an  indication  of  con- 
scious dignity.  It  is  a  prophecy  of  progress. 
^     While,  therefore,  our  own  country  feels  the  effect  of  agricultural  depression 

DOLPH 


8 


l«w  than  almost  any  other  in  the  world,  the  reduction  in  prices  of  most  staples, 
and  in  domestic  animals  and  their  products,  forces  a  disaj^reeable  comparison 
with  agricultural  values  at  their  highest,  compels  reduced  expenditure  to  keep 
outfit  subordinate  to  income,  increases  the  number  of  unfortunates  who  can 
not  make  "both  ends  meet,"  and  reduces  the  profits  of  the  enterprising  and 
'•killful  vrho  are  still  able  <o  strike  a  balance  in  their  favor.  Retrenchment  is 
not  an  agreeable  alternative,  and  is  therefore  delayed  until  its  compulsion  is 
imperative  and  perhaps  destructive.  "The  times"  are  universally  regarded  as 
"hard  "  in  comparison  vrith  more  prosperous  eras  of  the  past. 

It  matters  not  that  the  prices  of  implements,  utensils,  and  fabrics,  of  goods 
desired  by  the  farmer,  have  been  reduced  proportionally;  his  interest  account, 
if  be  has  one,  is  unreduced,  and  his  mortgage  is  a  greater  burden  to  lift.  He 
«igh«  for  the  good  old  days  of  high  prices,  though  they  may  have  been  war  or 
famine  prices,  necessarily  temfiorary,  and  though  they  may  have  been  the 
•source  of  extravagant  views,  unnecessary  expenditure,  and  the  foundation  of 
his  present  indebtedness.  He  naturally  resents  and  deplores  low  valuation  of 
"farm  products.  What  are  the  causes  of  low  prices?  They  may  be  various,  but 
the  prime  cause  is  the  operation  of  the  inexorable  law  of  supply  and  demand. 
Abundance  leads  inevitably  to  low  prices ;  scarcity  to  high  prices.  .With  either 
ithere  is  fluctuation,  a  see-sa^v  of  prices  which  increases  cost  and  reduces  profit. 
Medium  and  uniform  values  are  therefore  best  for  the  farmer. 

There  has  been  an  increase  of  production  in  this  country  even  more  rapid  than 
■^he  increment  of  population.  America  has  long  been  the  synonym  of  plethora. 
Her  people  probably  consume  more  than  those  of  any  other  nation,  and  have 
<*  larger  surplus  for  foreign  needs.  Immigration  has  been  heavy  and  uure- 
etrlcted;  railroad  building  has  been  stimulated  until  an  empire  of  new  and 
prodactive  lands  have  been  opened ;  and  these  lands  have  been  given  ad  lilnlum 
to  aettlers  of  native  or  foreign  birth.  Speculation  first,  and  profitable  utilixa- 
tion  afterwards,  have  been  the  motive  for  settlement  and  development  which 
have  astonished  the  world  and  caused  overproduction  and  low  prices.  The  fol- 
lowing statement  shows  the  increase  in  thirty  years  in  certain  products  of  the 
&rm,  as  reported  by  the  census : 


Products. 

1849. 

592,071,104 
100,  485, 944 
146,584,179 

65,797,899 
2,469,093 

13,838,642 

1859. 

1869. 

1879. 

<3om bushels. „ 

Wheat..: „  do 

"Oats _do 

Potatoes... do 

■Cotton „ bales... 

'fi»y tons... 

838,792,742 
173,104,924 
172, 64.3, 185 
111,148,867 
5,387,052 
19,083,896 

760,944,549 
287,'r4.5,626 
282, 107, 157 
143.337,473 
3,011,996 
27,316,048 

1,754,581,676 

459, 483, 137 

407,858,999 

169,458,539 

5,755,359 

85,150,711 

If  Tre  extend  the  comparison  to  the  present  date,  we  find  that  the  com  crop 
-exceeds  2,000,000,000  bushels,  wheat  approximates  500,000,000,  oats  exceed  700,- 
<NX),000,  and  hay  and  potatoes  have  increased  in  similar  proportion.  While  the 
pnoduct  may  be  three  or  four  times  as  large,  the  population  is  less  than  three 
times  as  much,  though  the  proportion  of  workers  engaged  in  agriculture  was 
larger  than  now. 

During  the  forty  years  from  1850  to  the  present  time  the  cotton  product  la- 
^reased  from  a  little  over  2,000,000  bales  to  more  than  7,000,000  bales.  Cattle  have 
also  increased  very  rapidly ;  cows  from  between  6,000,000  and  7,000,000  to  abont 
16,000,000;  other  cattle  from  scarcely  12,000,000  to  more  than  36,000,000.  While 
eheep  have  doubled  in  number, the  wool  production  has  quadrupled.  While  the 
milch  cows  are  almost  three  times  as  many,  their  average  rate  of  yield  of  milk 
"has  probably  doubled.  The  improvement  of  other  cattle,  through  breeding  and 
feeding,  has  reduced  the  time  required  for  maturity  and  increased  the  weight 
of  carcass  to  such  an  extent  that  the  amount  of  beef  produced  annually  In  pro- 
portion to  ntimbers  of  animals  kept  is  immensely  increased.  Kelative  numbers, 
in  oomptarison  with  the  past,  in  all  kinds  of  domestic  animals,  have  far  less  sig- 
nificance than  improvement  in  weight  and  quality,  in  thriftiness  and  early  ma- 
tarity. 

It  lis  difScult  to  force  a  market  abroad  for  a  surplus  of  any  product.  Every 
nation  is  seeking  to  produce  its  own  food,  and  as  far  as  possible  its  raw  materials 
for  extension  in  all  forms  of  industrial  production.  The  instinct  of  self-preser- 
vation compels  the  adoption  of  such  a  policy.  This  furnishes  the  motive  for 
the  com  laws  of  France  and  Germany  and  other  continental  countries,  and  the 
laws  of  European  nations  prohibiting  the  introduction  of  our  pork  products. 
We  ean  not  sell  our  crops  abroad,  as  a  rule,  except  to  fill  the  gaps  in  supply  thaft 
are  made  by  bad  seasons  or  other  results  of  the  inevitable  or  inexorable. 


In  wheat  overproduction  has  destroyed  the  grower's  profit.  Wheat  growing 
has  become  a  philanthropic  mission  for  supplying  cheap  bread  to  Great  Britain 
»nd  encouraging  her  manufacturers  to  Iceep  wages  on  a  low  plane.  The  North- 
western missionaries  are  still  dilii;ently  sowing  their  seed  and  floating  their 
bread  across  the  waters,  and  mourning  that  the  profits  do  not  return  to  them 
after  many  days  of  weary  transportation.  The  area  of  the  crop  of  1889  included 
about  10,000,000  acres  more  than  the  home  consumption  of  the  year  will  require; 
and  the  price  in  Liverpool  has  of  late  been  the  lowest  for  a  century. 

"We  can  not  force  foreigners  to  buy  our  bread.  There  has  been  a  mass  of  in- 
effable nonsense  regarding  "  the  markets  of  the  world  "  for  wheat.  Less  than 
a  fourth  of  the  people  of  the  world  eat  wheat.  Half  of  the  people  of  Europe 
scarcely  know  its  taste,  while  few  of  the  nations  of  Asia  and  Africa  have  any 
knowledge  of  it.  Eslewhere  the  statistician  has  thus  presented  the  limitations 
of  our  distribution  of  the  wheat  surplus : 

"South  America  is  now  no  market  for  flour,  as  more  wheat  is  grown  there 
than  is  required  for  domestic  consumption,  and  an  annually  enlarging  outlet 
for  wheat  is  now  sought  in  the  distribution  of  the  surplus.  Australasia  makes 
more  than  a  home  supply.  India  has  a  surplus  of  10  to  15  per  cent.  Eastern 
Burope  always  has  wheat  to  sell,  leaving  only  Western  Europe  to  supplement 
Ita  nearly  full  garners  with  the  contributions  of  all  other  countries,  those  of 
Burope  included.  Of  the  average  4  bushels  consumed  by  each  inhabitant  of 
Europe  only  a  half  bushel  comes  from  other  continents,  and  this  is  practically 
the  measure  of  the  market  for  the  wheat  surplus  of  the  world,  a  market  which 
neither  reciprocity  nor  the  persuasion  of  any  international  comity  tan  enlarge. 
Nothing  but  w^ar,  famine,  or  pestilence,  nothing  but  an  act  of  God  or  a  change 
of  crop  distribution  utterly  at  variance  with  long-settled  policy  and  practical 
sense  can  swell  to  sudden  importance  the  demand  for  wheat  and  flour  that  will 
relieve  prevailing  stagnation  and  advance  prices." 

The  production  of  meat  has  also  advanced  faster  than  population.  In  1880 
the  cattle  of  all  kinds  were  returned  as  39,675,533,  and  the  numbers  as  now  esti- 
mated, on  farms  and  ranches,  are  52,801,907,  or  33  per  cent.  more.  Excluding 
eows,  the  increase  of  other  cattle,  which  includes  the  beeves,  is  equivalent  to 
about  40  per  cent.  Then  beeves  are  brought  to  maturity  more  rapidly  than  for- 
n&rly,  and  more  meat  is  made  in  proportion  to  numbers,  so  that  the  beef  sup- 
ply is  greater  than  in  1880  in  proportion  to  population.  The  ratio  of  supply  has 
been  very  greatly  increased  since  1S50.  Our  export  of  beef  has  grown  up  in  the 
past  thirteen  years,  and  the  export  of  cattle  has  not  only  increased,  but  its  char- 
acter has  changed  from  the  shipment  of  Texas  or  Florida  long-horns  to  Cuba 
to  the  export  of  fat  beeves  to  Europe,  one  of  which  commands  the  price  of  five 
of  the  original  style  of  Gulf  coast  cattle.  This  difference  represents  not  pre- 
cisely the  meat-making  capacity  of  the  cattle  of  1850  and  1890  respectively,  but 
It  suggests  the  wide  disparity  between  the  ratio  of  meat  to  numbers  of  cattle  at 
the  two  dates. 

It  is  futile  to  attempt  to  defy  the  law  of  supply  and  demand.  So  long  as  farm- 
ers insist  on  growing  only  the  bread  grains,  cotton,  tobacco,  and  cattle,  and 
to  neglect  other  products  which  are  needed,  which  we  import  at  a  cost  of  more 
than  $200,000,000  annually,  just  so  long  will  the  lamentation  over  low  prices  con- 
tinue. Diversification  is  essential  to  agricultural  salvation.  There  are  writers 
and  speakers  who  are  doing  incalculable  injury  by  their  influence  in  repression 
of  any  tendency  to  a  wider  range  of  rural  produclion,  encouraging  indolence 
and  idleness,  paralyzingenterprise,  intensifying  rural  inertia,  and  encouragring 
deptendence  on  foreign  production,  and  the  draining  of  the  resources  of  the 
country  to  foreign  lands.  They  appear  to  deprecate  any  effort  towards  inde- 
pendence or  the  cultivation  of  self-reliance,  the  stimulation  of  invention,  the 
acquisition  of  manual  skill,  or  the  development  of  rural  taste.  Their  advice 
points  in  the  direction  of  aimless  poverty  and  practical  serfdom. 

The  agricultural  exports  of  the  United  Stales  during  the  past  year  amounted 
to  about  $530,000,000  at  the  seaports,  or  about  S400,000,000  on  the  farms.  The  agri- 
cultural imports  amounted  to  over  8348,000,000  at  ports  of  shipment,  and  fully 
$400,000,OCO  with  freights  and  commissions  added,  without  further  allow^ance  for 
undervaluation.  Thus  it  takes  most  of  our  agricultural  exports  to  pay  for  agri- 
cultural imports.  These  imports  are  largely  food  and  fibers.  The  heavier  items 
for  188S-'89  were  as  follows : 

Sugar  and  molasses 893,297,868 

Animals  and  their  products,  except  wool 40,419,502 

Fibers,  animal  and  vegetable 59,453,936 

Fruits  and  nuts „ 18, 746, 417 

Barley  and  other  cereals 8,971,722 

Tobacco,  leaf „ 10, 868, 226 

Wines 7.706,772 

Total _ .'t _ 239,464,443 

DOLPH 


10 

Moflt  of  thla  importation  should  be  produced  here,  and  many  minor  procla«t» 
not  named;  in  fact,  there  is  little  on  the  list,  except  tea  and  coffee,  that  should 
be  imported.  There  are  many  plants  yielding  fruits,  dyes,  medicines,  and  other 
products  useful  in  the  arts  or  for  food  that  could  be  profitably  grown,  after  suiW 
ablo  experiment,  for  the  supply  of  a  demand  already  existing  or  to  be  created, 
and  atilizing  rural  labor  and  increasing  the  wealth  of  the  country. 

•  ••••«• 

There  may  be  minor  causes  of  depression  which  have  not  been  considered, 
but  they  are  impotent  and  unimportant  in  comparison  w^ith  those  outlined. 
The  main  difficulty  is,  there  is  overproduction  of  a  few  staples  and  quite  too 
limited  a  list  of  rural  products.  There  is  too  much  hog  and  hominy,  and  % 
UJirrow  ranje  of  delicacies  that  are  so  eagerly  sought  by  the  buyer  and  ^o  profit- 
able to  the  producer.  There  is  too  much  rural  labor  unemployed,  and  too  much 
mechanical  and  manufacturing  labor  idle  in  both  cases  for  lack  of  sufficient  va- 
riety, and  because  $500,000,000  or  $600,000,000  are  spent  in  foreign  countries  for 
products  that  oould  better  be  made  here.  It  is  useless,  it  is  foolish,  to  say  that 
we  can  not  sell  our  surplus  unless  we  buy  our  food  and  clothing  abroad. 

We  did  sell  last  year  to  a  single  country  to  the  amount  of  $201, 000,000  more 
than  we  bought  of  that  country,  and  a  similar  disproportion  exists  every  year. 

As  we  become  more  independent,  more  self-sustaining,  producing  all  sub- 
utantials  of  life,  wealth  w^ill  more  abound,  and  be  more  equally  distributed 
under  the  industrial  than  under  the  commercial  idea;  and  while  imports  will 
still  be  heavy,  they  will  be  mainly  for  luxuriesandsuperfluitiesof  the  rich,  and 
■will  not  reduce  the  resources  or  limit  the  comforts  of  the  people. 

In  a  primitive  country  the  first  business  of  farmers  la  to  produce  food,  to  cater 
to  the  wants  of  the  stomach ;  if  they  go  no  farther,  as  population  advances  and 
its  wanta  increase  -with  the  progress  of  culture  and  civilization,  and  so  neglect 
to  supply  the  "  raw  materials  "  for  the  uses  of  the  industrial  arts,  their  country 
\eill  forever  remain  primitive  and  poor.  This  country  can  notclaim  exemption 
from  the  inexorable  rule.  Cotton,  by  the  invention  of  the  gin,  and  the  existence 
of  a  suitable  soil  in  the  South,  became  the  salvation  of  its  agriculture,  and  then 
threatened  its  existence  by  its  refusal  to  tolerate  other  raw  materials  for  other 
arts.  The  cotton  crop  is  valuable  and  will  represent  a  larger  value,  yet  it  would 
not  suffice  to  board  the  people  of  the  South  at  first-class  hotels  for  a  'week.  A 
score  of  other  products  should  further  enrich  her  agriculture  to  relieve  existing 
depression.  AH  the  worsted  wools  and  all  the  carpet  wools  that  can  be  woven 
in  the  country  can  readily  be  produced  in  the  South.  Only  the  invention  of  an 
effective  decorticator  is  required  to  make  ramie  a  great  industry,  supplement- 
ing rather  than  rivaling  cotton ;  and  jute  and  many  native  and  foreigrn  fibers 
should  swell  the  list  of  raw  materials. 

And  there  should  be  no  more  need  of  going  to  Italy  or  Japan  for  raw  silk 
than  there  is  to  India  for  raw  cotton.  Further,  there  should  be  just  as  little 
need  of  going  to  Cuba  for  sugar.  Nine-tenths  (at  least)  of  all  the  raw  materials 
required  for  textile,  metalic,  mechanical,  chemical,  oleaginous  or  other  manu- 
facture can  be  produced  primarily  by  our  farmers,  diverting  their  labor  to 
profitable  channels,  and  swelling  the  value  of  their  products,  steadying  the 
prices  of  the  food  staples,  and  insuring  prosperity  and  comfort  to  all.  No  other 
ptanaoea  will  cure  hard  limes;  a  profitable  outlet,  by  diversification  and  exten- 
sion, for  constantly  augmenting  rural  labor,  can  alone  make  rural  industry 
profitable.  If  the  policy  of  going  abroad  for  all  fibers  except  cotton  shall  be 
put  into  permanent  practice,  and  for  all  sugar  and  fruits,  barley  and  oil  seeds, 
to  be  paid  for  in  corn  and  wheat  and  cotton,  which  are  already  crowded  into 
foreign  markets  to  the  last  pound  and  bushel,  there  will  be  no  necessity  for  a 
"  single  tax  "  to  make  the  farmer's  land  valueless,  and  no  need  of  account- 
books  or  pocket-books,  and  little  demand  for  books  of  any  kind. 

And  yet  there  is  gross  ignorance  abroad  of  the  extent  of  these  limitations  of 
our  agriculture,  and  of  the  means  of  recuperation.  Many  of  our  farmers  are 
delaying  the  emancipation  of  rural  industry,  and  seeking  to  import  cordage  to 
bind  upon  their  backs  still  closer  their  present  burdens.  Instead  of  enlarging 
the  range  of  profitable  production,  they  are  seeking  to  restrict  it.  The  wheat- 
growers  insist  upon  going  to  the  antipodes  for  binder-twine,  while  a  million 
acres  of  flax  fiber  is  wasted  in  adjoining  fields,  and  when  they  could  produce 
hemp  enough  ■within  six  months  to  bind  the  wheat  of  the  world.  The  cotton- 
growers  ■want  to  go  to  India  for  jute,  ■which  will  grow  in  their  cotton  fields  as 
readily  as  weeds.  If  we  will  not  produce  the  twine  to  bind  our  sheaves,  or  the 
jute  or  hemp  or  flax  to  cover  our  bales,  we  shall  have  no  right  to  complain  of  W 
cents  per  bushel  for  the  one  or  5  cents  per  pound  for  the  other. 

During  the  last  ten  years  more  than  two  million  ^vorkers  in  agriculture,  armed 
■with  improved  implements,  have  been  added  to  the  seven  millions  that  were 
making  corn  and  wheat  and  cotton;  and  shall  they  still  insist  on  the  same 
limited  range  of  effort,  walk  in  the  same  furrows  their  fathers  turned,  and  seek 
to  live  and  die  in  the  same  overdone  and  profitles  routine?    If  so,  ag^ioultoral 


11 

depresaion  will  become  chronic  and  Intensified  to  a  degree  unknown  at  present. 
Shall  farmers  hug  the  chains  of  their  dependence,  limit  the  range  of  their  in- 
dustry, refuse  to  strike  out  into  new  paths,  and  sink  into  comparative  idlenes» 
and  poverty?  There  are  millions  of  them  too  intelligent  and  enterprising  and 
ambitious  to  co-operate  in  any  such  scheme  of  self-degradation. 

Little  can  be  added  to  this  admirable  statement  of  the  case.  If  Mr. 
Dodge's  facts  are  correct  and  his  conclusions  well  drawn,  it  follows  that 
instead  of  removing  duties  upon  imports  of  labor  products  into  the 
United  States,  the  dutjes  should  be  maintained  in  order  to  stimulate 
every  industry  which  gives  employment  to  labor  and  creates  a  demand 
at  home  for  farm  products.  Instead  of  admitting  into  this  country  free 
of  duty  wool  and  other  farm  products  we  should  maintain  the  present 
duty;  and  in  some  cases  the  duties  should  be  increased  so  as  to  make 
them  practically  prohibitory. 

In  times  of  business  depression,  from  whatever  cause  produced,  it  is 
natural  to  blame  the  laws  for  the  exisiting  condition.  The  laws  may 
or  may  not  be  to  blame.  The  price  of  every  commodity  is  determined 
by  supply  and  demand.  There  is  no  way  in  any  industry  to  restrict 
production  to  the  probable  demand,  where  so  many  are  engaged  as  are 
employed  in  farming,  and  as  aconsequence  the  supply  must  vary,  even 
if  the  demand  remains  reasonably  stable.  So  with  other  productions. 
It  follows  that  a  business,  during  the  most  prosperous  condition  of  the 
country  and  under  the  best  possible  laws,  can  not  at  all  times  be  equally 
profitable.  The  farmer  will  have  his  good  and  his  bad  years.  One  year 
the  manufacturer  will  be  able  to  operate  his  factory  at  a  profit;  another 
year  he  must  operate  it  at  a  loss,  or  not  at  all. 

What  can  Congress  do  now  to  aid  the  farmers  ?  The  Senator  from  In- 
diana and  those  who  think  like  him  say,  "  Eemove  the  duties  which 
keep  out  foreign  goods,  and  let  the  farmer  obtain  them  at  the  foreign 
prices."  I  and  ail  who  believe  general  employment  necessary  to  na- 
tional prosperity  say,  ' '  Continue  the  protective  system  so  as  to  maintain 
existing  industries,  bring  others  into  existence,  build  up  and  strengthen 
the  home  market  so  as  to  consume  at  home  more  farm  products,  and 
bring  the  consumer  and  producer  together,  and  thus  save  the  cost  of 
transportation. ' '  I  say  also,  increase  the  duties  upon  all  the  iarm  prod- 
ucts that  are  imported  into  the  United  States,  to  enable  our  farmers  aa 
fiir  as  possible  to  produce  them  at  home. 

If  we  examine  the  last  published  reports  of  our  imports  and  exports 
we  shall  find  that  an  enormous  sum  is  paid  to  foreign  countries  for 
articles  of  food,  every  particle  of  which  should  be  produced  in  this 
country.  Why  is  it  necessary  to  import  into  this  country  $2,500,000 
worth  of  vegetables,  including  cabbage,  from  Holland,  317,156  bushels 
of  potatoes  from  Scotland,  1,441,466  bushels  of  potatoes,  and  608,433 
bushels  of  beans  and  pease  fi-om  Canada  and  Nova  Scotia  ?  Why  is  it 
necovssary  to  import  over  $1,000,000  worth  of  hay,  and  nearly  $8,000,000 
worth  of  breadstuflfs,  and  over  16,000,000  dozen  eggs,  some  of  which 
came  from  Denmark,  Norway,  and  Sweden,  and,  the  Senator  from  Iowa 
[Mr.  Allison]  says,  some  of  them  from  Italy  ? 

I  hold  in  my  hand  a  newspaper  clipping  from  a  Canada  paper,  or  at 
least  what  purports  to  be  a  telegram  or  letter  from  Ottawa,  Ontario, 
in  which  is  stated  the  amount  of  certain  articles  imported  into  Canada 
from  the  United  States  free  of  duty,  the  amount  of  dutiable  articles, 
and  the  amount  of  similar  articles  exported  from  Canada  into  the 
United  States.  I  will  submit  the  table,  simply  saying  that  I  under- 
stand the  first  two  columns  represent  the  value  of  the  articles  which  are 

DOI.PH 


12 


imported  into  Canada,  and  the  last  column  represents  the  articles  and 
the  value  thereof  exported  from  Canada  to  the  United  States. 

Taking  the  trade  and  navi^tion  returns  of  the  Dominion  for  the  year  endinc 
June  30,  18S7,  it  is  shown  that  the  exchange  between  the  Dominion' and  United 
States  in  commodities  was  aa  follows  : 


Free 
goods. 


Dutiable. 


Exported 

to  United 

States. 


Animals  of  all  kinds.. 

Straw 

Hay — 

Vegetables _ 

Salt 

Pease « 

Beans 

Barley  _ 

Malt 

Bye ,— 

Oats 

Buckwheat 

Rye  flour „ 

Oatmeal 

Buckwheat  flour 

Butter 

Cheese  „ 

Fishery  products 

Stone  and  marble 

Lime 

Gypsum 

Lumber,  timber,  etc... 
Grindstones 


$883,146 


6,023 


5,482 
1,385 


2,492 

474,344 

1,860 


$265,521 

45 

4,936 

173,652 

7,346 

6,339 

7,588 

2,557 

19,296 

2,539 

7,641 

27 

503 

6,585 

933 

51,733 

10,567 

452, 893 

83,628 

8,524 


$7,291,368 

21,338 

670,749 

404. 119 

16,962 

831,349 

206,840 

5, 245, 968 

146,012 

67,269 

12,210 


3,806 


101, 7OT 
14,382 


17.207 
30.667 

2,717,509 

65,300 

41,285 

191,276 

9,352,-506 
23,358 


Mr.  President,  I  am  glad  to  know  that  fbe  dominant  party  in  Con- 
gress, at  least  in  the  other  House,  are  disposed  to  take  the  same  view 
of  the  question  of  duties  upon  agricultural  products  which  I  have  just 
indicated. 

I  hold  in  my  hand  an  article  clipped  from  yesterday  morning's  Wash- 
ington Post,  with  the  heading,  '"A  protection  for  the  Grangers."  As 
the  newspapers  are  supposed  to  know  everything,  I  presume  it  to  be 
correct,  and  from  the  best  information  I  can  obtain  I  believe  it  to  be  so. 
The  article  is  as  follows: 

PROTECTION'  FOB  THB  GRANGERS — THB  GREAT  WORK  OF    THE  LEGKLATIVE  COM- 
MITTEE  OF   THE    PATRONS   OF   HUSBANDRY. 

The  legislative  committee  of  the  National  Grange,  Patrons  of  Husbandry, 
ofiice  514  F  street,  has  issued  an  address  to  the  different  granges  of  the  country 
showing  the  results  of  its  labors  with  the  Ck>mmittee  on  Ways  and  Means. 
The  legislative  committee  furnishes  the  following  list  of  farm  products  which 
the  Ways  and  Means  Committee  has  agreed  to  protect,  and  the  amount  of  tax 
laid  on  each  article : 
Animals: 

Horses  and  mules $30.00 

Horses  and  mules  valued  at  $150  and-over 30  per  cent. 

Cattle  more  than  one  year  old „ $10.00 

Cattle  less  than  one  year  old ™ „ „ 2.00 

Hogs „.        .50 

Sheep 1.50 

All  other  live  animals 20  per  cent. 

Breadstuifs: 

Barley ^ 30  cents  per  busheL 

Barley,  malt„ „ 40  cents  per  busbeL 

Barley,  pearled  patent,  or  bulled 1  cent  per  pound. 

DOLPH 


13 

Backwhe&t 10  cents  per  bushel. 

Corn- 10  cents  per  bushel. 

Corn  meal -- 10  cents  per  busheL 

Hacaronu > « ...~,^ 2  cents  per  pound. 

Oats _ 10  cents  per  busheL-' 

Oatnaeal 1  cent  per  pound. 

Eice — .  li  cents  per  pound. 

Eye ., „ - 10  cents  per  bushel. 

Eye  flour i  cent  per  pound. 

Wheat  _ ~ 20  cents  per  bushel. 

Wheat  flour .-- 20  per  cent,  ad  valorem. 

Dairy  products : 
Butter  and  substitutes- ™ « 6  cents  per  pound- 
Cheese  ™.„ - 6  cents  per  pound. 

Milk  _ 5  cents  per  gallon. 

MUk,  preserved  or  condensed  _ _ -3  cents  per  pound. 

Farm  and  field  products : 

Beans „ 40  cents  per  bushel. 

Beans,  pease,  mushrooms,  prepared „ 40  per  cent. 

Broom-corn ..„ „ „._ - $8  per  ton. 

Cabbages,  each .............._ .«..«_... 3  cents. 

Cider '. „ 5  cents  per  gallon. 

Sggrs „ „ 5  cents  per  dozen. 

■Eggs,  yolks  of ™  _...« 25  per  cent. 

Hay „ ..„ _ $4  per  ton. 

Hides - » ~. ~ 15  per  cent. 

Honey ^ ...20  cents  per  gallon. 

Hops- _.. „ _ 12  cents  per  pound. 

Onions 25  per  cent. 

Pease  ..._ ...._ 40  cents  per  busheL 

Split  pease „ „ , 20  cents  per  busheL 

Potatoes.. _...t..„.. 20  cents  per  busheL 

Flaxseed _ 30  cents  per  busheL 

Garden  seed „ 20percent. 

Vegetables  (prepared) _. _ „ 45  per  cent. 

Vegetables  (natural  state) _ „ „.._... 25  per  cent. 

^raw _ „ _ $2  per  ton. 

Teasles ., .,..„ _ 30  per  cent. 

Tobacco  (for  wrappers) „ „ $2  per  pound. 

Fruits  and  nuta : 

Apples,  green 25  cents  per  bushel.' 

Apples,  dried „ „ „ 2  cents  per  pound. 

Dates,  grapes,  plums,  prunes- _ _ ~ 1  cent  per  pound. 

Kgs 2cent3  per  pound. 

Oranges,  according  to  size  of  package - 25  cents  to  $1  per  box  or  case. 

Raisins 2  cents  per  pound. 

Frui*  preserves „ 20  per  cents. 

Almonds,  not  shelled .,....„ 5  cents  per  pound. 

Almonds,  shelled -.....„.._....„...._ 7^  cents  per  pound. 

Filberts  and  walnutfl  _ „.„....„_ „™ ........„....„....2  cents  per  pound. 

Peanuts,  un.shelled „.„...._ _..._ .t.~__ ~ 1  cent  per  pound. 

Peanuts,  shelled li  cents  per  pound. 

Nuts,  not  enumerated. ...„ ... „ „ „ ._ _ li  cents  per  pound. 

Meat  products: 

Bacon  and  ham _...._ _ „....5  cents  per  pound. 

Beef,  mutton,  and  pork _ 2  cents  per  pound. 

Meats  of  all  kinds,  prepared  and  preserved ...._ _ 25  per  cent. 

Lard „ _ _ 2  cents  per  pound. 

Poultry,  live „ _-._.„... „ _.. Scents  per  pound. 

Tallow _ -.-.-.~.- .»„...„.„._._ _„...._ J. 1  cent  per  pound. 

Vinegar _ _ .' 75  cents  per  gallon. 

The  present  duty  upon  horses  and  mules  is  20  per  cent.  It  will  be 
observed  that  the  proposed  duty  is  to  be  $30  per  head  on  horses  and 
mules  valued  at  less  than  $150,  and  on  those  valued  at  $150  and  over, 
30  per  cent.  Under  the  existing  tariff  there  are  imported  into  the 
United  States  something  over  $3,000,000  in  value  of  animals  free  of 
duty  and  about  $780,000  in  value  of  dutiable  animals,  all  animals  for 
breeding  purposes  and  all  emigrant  teams,  etc.,  being  admitted  free. 


14 

Under  the  existing  law  the  duty  upon  barley  is  10  cents  per  bnshel; 
ihe  proposed  duty  is  30  cents  per  bushel. 

Under  the  existing  law  barley  malt  is  20  cents  per  bushel ;  under 
the  proposed  law  it  is  40  cents  per  busheL 

Under  the  existing  law  barley  pearled,  etc.,  is  one-half  a  cent  per 
pound;  under  the  proposed  law  it  is  to  be  1  cent  per  pound. 

Under  the  existing  law  buckwheat  is  10  per  cent.,  while  under  the 
proposed  law  it  is  to  be  10  cents  per  bushel. 

Under  the  existing  law  butter  is  4  cents  a  pound;  under  the  pro- 
posed law  it  is  to  be  6  cents  per  pound. 

Cheese  under  the  existing  law  is  4  cents;  under  the  proposed  law, 
6  cents  per  pound. 

Milk  under  the  existing  law  is  10  per  cent.,  and  under  the  proposed 
law  it  is  to  be  5  cents  per  gallon. 

Beans  and  pease,  etc.,  prepared  under  the  existing  law  are  30  per 
■cent.,  and  under  the  proposed  law  the  duty  is  to  be  40  per  cent. 

Broom-corn  under  existing  law  is  10  per  cent. ;  under  the  proposed 
law  it  is  to  be  $8  per  ton. 

Cabbages  under  the  existing  law  are  10  per  cent. ;  under  the  pro- 
posed law  the  duty  is  to  be  3  cents  apiece. 

Eggs  under  the  existing  law  are  free;  under  the  proposed  law  the 
duty  is  to  be  5  cents  per  dozen. 

Under  the  existing  law  the  duty  on  hops  is  8  cents;  under  the  pro- 
posed law  it  is  to  be  12  cents  per  pound. 

Under  theexisting  law  the  duty  on  onions  is  10  percent;  under  the 
proposed  law  it  is  to  be  25  per  cent. 

Under  the  existing  law  the  duty  on  potatoes  is  15  cents  per  bnshel; 
under  the  proposed  law  it  is  to  be  20  cents  per  bushel. 

Under  the  proposed  law  the  duty  on  flaxseed  is  20  cents  per  bushel; 
finder  the  proposed  law  it  is  to  be  30  cents  per  bushel. 

Under  the  existing  law  the  duty  on  pease  is  10  per  cent. ;  under  the 
proposed  law  it  is  to  be  40  per  cent. 

Under  the  existing  law  the  duty  on  vegetables  prepared  is  30  per 
cent. ;  under  the  proposed  law  it  is  to  be  45  per  cent. 

Under  the  existing  law  vegetables  in  the  natural  state  pay  10  per 
cent. ;  under  the  proposed  law  25  per  cent. 

Under  the  existing  law  straw  is  free;  under  the  proposed  law  the 
duty  is  to  be  $2  per  ton. 

Under  the  existing  law  apples  green  and  apples  dried  are  free;  under 
the  proposed  law  apples  green  are  to  pay  a  duty  of  25  cents  per  bushel, 
and  dried  apples  2  cents  per  pound. 

Under  the  existing  law  the  duty  on  bacon  and  hams  is  2  cents  per 
pound;  under  the  proposed  law  it  is  to  be  5  cents  per  pound. 

Under  the  existing  law  the  duty  on  beef  and  pork  is  1  cent  per  potind ; 
onder  the  proposed  law  it  is  to  be  2  cents  per  pound. 

TBUST8. 

There  is  another  way  in  which  the  producer  may  be  benefited  by 
legislation,  and  that  is  by  enacting  and  executing  laws  to  prevent  gam- 
bling and  speculation  in  the  products  of  labor.  I  am  sorry  to  say  that 
the  power  of  Congress  is  limited  to  deal  with  this  matter;  but  the  power 
of  the  States  is  ample,  and  should  be  exercised. 

Labor  is  the  source  of  all  wealth.  No  other  means  of  producing 
wealth  have  ever  been  or  ever  will  be  found.  It  must  be  wrung  from 
the  soil  by  patient  toil;  it  must  be  brought  up  from  mines  deep  in  the 
earth  by  the  labor  of  man ;  it  must  be  coined  from  the  forest  by  the  axman 


15 

«iid  the  millman;  it  must  be  wrought  out  from  raw  materials  by  the 
•kill,  the  patience,  and  the  labor  of  human  operatives.  The  curse  of 
this  and  all  other  communities  to-day  is  that  so  many  persona  are  trying 
to  escape  this  Heaven-ordained  law,  and  to  secure  something  for  noth- 
ing— wealth  without  labor. 

This  is  at  the  bottom  of  every  wild  scheme  to  create  wealth  without 
labor  and  to  create  its  representative  (money)  by  legislation  alone,  to 
have  the  Government  do  by  legislation  for  the  citizen  what  he  can  only 
do  for  himself  by  labor.  This  is  at  the  bottom  of  all  gambling  contri- 
vances, speculative  combinations,  all  the  attempts  to  control  the  prod- 
ucts of  the  mills,  factories,  and  farms,  and  to  fix  the  prices  for  both 
consumer  and  producer.  This  fever  of  speculation  grows  hotter  during 
times  of  business  depression  when  capital  is  unemployed.  Combina- 
tions, monopolies,  speculators  may  indeed  acquire  wealth,  but  it  is 
wealth  that  has  been  produced  by  labor.  I  repeat,  labor  only  can  pro- 
duce wealth,  and  all  schemes,  whether  of  legislation  or  of  speculation, 
to  produce  it  otherwise  will  fail.  The  strong  arm  of  the  law  should  be 
interposed  to  protect  the  producers  and  consumers  of  the  country  from 
being  plundered  by  such  organizations. 

The  advocates  of  free  trade  tell  us  that  trusts  and  combinations  to 
control  products  and  prices  are  fostered  by  the  tariff.  But  every  one 
knows  that  some  of  the  most  gigantic  and  oppressive  trusts  in  this 
country  were  formed  to  deal  in  articles  of  purely  domestic  manufacture, 
the  prices  of  which  are  not  atFected  in  the  least  by  the  tariff;  that 
others  are  formed  to  deal  in  articles  which  are  imported  free;  and  others 
still  are  formed  to  deal  in  articles  which  are  both  imported  and  pro- 
duced in  this  country.  The  truth  is  that  the  tariff  has  nothing  what- 
ever to  do  with  the  question  of  trusts. 

FABM  MOKTGAQES.  • 

A  great  deal  has  been  said  on  this  floor  and  elsewhere  about  farm 
mortgages,  and  it  appears  to  be  thought  by  some  that  if  the  number 
of  farm  mortgages  is  large  in  any  State  or  Territory  it  indicates  an  nn- 
prosperous  condition  of  the  farmer.  But  nothing  is  farther  from  the 
truth.  Nothing  can  be  absolutely  predicated  as  to  the  prosperity  or 
lack  of  properity  of  the  iiarmers  of  a  community  from  the  existence  or 
non-existence  of  farm  mortgages.  The  inference  to  be  drawn  from  the 
number  of  mortgages  in  an  old,  settled  country,  like  one  of  the  New 
England  States,  might  be  very  different  from  the  inference  to  be  drawn 
from  the  same  thing  in  a  newer  community.  In  a  new  State  a  large 
number  of  farm  mortgages  may  indicate  great  prosperity,  may  repre- 
sent cultivated  and  productive  farms  and  comfortable  homes,  where, 
without  the  ability  to  borrow,  there  would  have  been  a  wacte  and  un- 
productive area.  They  may  have  been  the  means  by  which  day  labor- 
ers on  the  farm  have  been  converted  into  prosperous  farmers  on  their 
own  account.  In  many  cases  they  represent  additional  lands,  pur- 
chased on  credit,  which  are  a  source  of  increased  prosperity,  and  so  a 
blessing. 

In  the  State  I  have  the  honor  in  part  to  represent  I  "can  remember 
when,  in  the  beautiful  and  fertile  Willamette  Valley,  most  of  the  orig- 
inal claimants  still  owned  and  occupied  their  donation  claims  of  640 
acres  free  from  mortgage,  and  when  many  of  the  claims  did  not  even 
furnish  the  agricultural  productions  necessary  lor  the  support  of  their 
families.  But  another  generation  grew  up.  Enterprising  young  men, 
without  means,  from  nearly  every  State  of  the  Union,  went  to  that 


16 

State,  bought  lands  on  credit,  gave  mortgages  for  the  purchase  price, 
began  to  raise  Irom  40  to  60  bushels  of  wheat  to  the  acre,  and  in  prob^ 
»bly  forty-nine  cases  out  of  fifty  have  paid  oflF  the  mortgages  and  have 
become  wealthy  and  prosperous  farmers. 

Mortgages  are  only  necessarily  an  indication  of  a  want  of  prosperity 
of  the  farming  class  when  they  represent  indebtedness  for  living  ex- 
penses or  losses  in  conducting  business;  and  such  cases  are  as  likely 
to  be  the  result  of  extravagance  and  bad  management  as  poor  crops 
and  low  prices.  I  repeat,  the  statements  which  we  hear  from  time  to 
time  in  this  Chamber  and  published  in  the  free-trade  press,  as  to  the 
number  and  amount  of  farm  mortgages,  may  as  well  be  taken  as  evi- 
dence of  prosperity  as  of  the  reverse. 

THK  UNEQUAL  DISTKIBUTIOS  OF  WBALTH. 

The  Senator  from  Indiana  [Mr.  Vooehkes]  dwelt  at  length  upon  the 
unequal  distribution  of  wealth  in  this  country.  There  is,  it  is  true,  a 
great  inequality  in  the  distribution  of  wealth.  This  inequality  has 
naturally  increased  with  the  growth  of  the  country,  the  division  o 
labor,  and  the  multiplication  of  large  establishments  to  conduct  every 
kind  of  business.  But  it  is  produced  by  causes  largely  beyond  the  con- 
trol of  legislation.  It  will  continue  while  the  world  endures,  for  some 
men  will  always  be  industrious,  economical,  and  acquisitive,  while 
others  will  be  indolent,  extravagant,  and  wasteful.  Some  will  possess 
the  ability  to  make  and  keep  money,  while  others  will  have  the  capac- 
ity only  for  spending  it.  Some  will  be  enterprising  and  successful, 
while  others  vvill  fail  in  every  undertaking.  Fathers  will  continue  to 
acquire  fortunes  to  be  squandered  by  their  sons.  If  the  wealth  of  the 
world  were  to  be  equally  distributed  to-day,  within  five  years  there 
would  be  larger  fortunes  and  more  paupers  than  ever  before  in  the 
world's  history. 

Nor  do  I  think  there  is  as  much  difference  between  the  prosperity  of 
the  farmers  and  of  those  engaged  in  other  industries  as  the  free-trader 
would  have  the  farmer  believe.  In  this  country  every  occupation  is 
open  to  all.  A  man  may  obtain  a  farm  from  the  public  domain,  by  liv- 
ing on  it,  and  it  requires  but  a  compai-ative  small  capital  to  work  it. 
If  a  farmer  believes  that  he  can  do  better  at  some  other  occupation  there 
is  nothing  to  prevent  him  from  entering  it.  Where  there  is  such  free- 
dom for  selection  of  occupation  the  tendency  must  constantly  be  for 
those  engaged  in  the  less  profitable  to  seek  the  more  remunerative  em- 
ployments; and  it  would  appear  that  if  the  profits  of  a  farmer  are  not 
as  large  as  the  profits  of  those  engaged  in  other  occupations  there  must 
be  some  other  compensating  advantages  to  induce  him  to  continue  his 
calling. 

It  is  no  test  of  the  merits  of  the  protective  system  that  under  it,  dur- 
ing a  season  of  depression  and  overproduction,  the  farmer  is  not  pros- 
perous. The  real  tests  are  his  condition  during  periods  when  the  pro- 
tective policy  has  prevailed  as  compared  with  his  condition  during 
periods  when  the  policy  of  a  tariff  for  revenue  only  has  been  tried,  and 
his  condition  in  this  country  during  periods  of  protection  as  compared 
with  the  condition  of  farmers  in  countries  where  free  trade  prevails.  I 
have  not  time  to  enter  into  details  in  contrasting  the  present  condition 
of  the  farmer  in  this  country  with  his  condition  prior  to  tariff  legisla- 
tion under  a  Republican  administration.  Besides,  I  have  something 
to  present,  to  show  his  condition  as  compared  with  that  of  the  farmers 
of  free-trade  countries,  quite  as  important  and  not  so  generally  under- 
stood. 


17 

Suffice  it  to  say,  in  a  word,  that  the  conditioa  of  the  farmera  of  tha 
United  States  to-day,  notwithstanding  the  depressed  condition  of  agri- 
culture, is  immeasurably  better  than  before  the  war.  I  think  there  ia 
no  doubt  that  in  proportion  to  their  numbers  there  are  fewer  mort- 
gages upon  their  larms.  Their  houses  are  homes  of  luxury  compared 
with  the  farm-houses  of  that  period.  The  log  cabins  and  the  cramped 
and  inconvenient  farm-houses,  the  kitchen  fire-places,  the  bare  floors, 
the  rough  walls,  the  home-made  furniture,  the  cupboard  of  rough 
shelves,  which  largely  prevailed  within  ray  own  recollection,  have  been 
supplanted  by  modern  cottages,  containing  the  conveniences  of  life,  and 
the  farmers'  tables  are  loaded  with  food  that  was  then  considered  lux- 
aries.  The  appliances  for  cultivation,  the  tools  for  plowing,  sowing, 
reaping,  and  thrashing,  and  the  facilities  for  marketing  have  ail  been 
improved.  The  farmer,  as  a  rule,  works  fewer  hours,  and  his  children 
do  not  go  to  the  field  as  so  tender  an  age.  The  hardest  portions  of  hia 
work,  once  done  by  hand,  are  now  accomplished  by  machinery.  Hia 
children  are  better  clothed  and  better  educated.  .  In  short,  in  every 
way  the  farmer  of  to-day,  even  if  his  farm  is  mortgaged,  lives  better 
than  the  man  who  held  the  mortgage  didjln  the  ante-bellum  days. 

What  does  our  experience  as  a  nation  during  the  century  of  our  ex- 
istence show  as  to  the  effect  of  a  protective  policy  upon  the  farmer  and 
other  productive  interests  of  the  country?  As  I  read  our  history  in 
connection  with  the  tariff  it  shows  that  absolutely  all  the  prosperity 
of  the  farmers  of  this  country,  as  well  as  all  the  pro.sperity  we  have 
enjoyed  as  a  nation,  has  been  enjoyed  when  the  protective  policy  has 
prevailed,  and  that  the  abandonment  of  that  policy  in  whole  or  in  part 
has  always  caused  busiuess  depression,  scarcity  of  employment,  low 
wages,  and  hard  times,  and  that  at  such  times  the  farmer  has  always 
Buffered  moat. 

I  have  not  time  upon  this  occasion  to  review  the  history  of  tariff  legla- 
lation  in  this  country,  but  I  will  briefly  refer  to  a  few  of  the  salient 
points  of  that  history. 

One  of  the  strongest  reasons  which,  prior  to  the  adoption  of  the  Con- 
stitution, were  urged  in  favor  of  a  stronger  government  was  that  the 
power  to  regulate  commerce,  to  impose  duties  upon  imports  for  the 
protection  of  manufactures,  wa^  necessary  to  revive  and  make  pros- 
perous our  languishing  indastries.  The  preamble  of  the  first  tarifi  act, 
signed  by  President  Washington,  recited  that  the  imposition  of  duties 
was  necessary  for  the  encouragement  and  protection  of  manufactures. 
Until  1816  the  duties  levied  were  not  sufficient  to  afford  adequate  pro- 
tection to  American  industries,  but  under  the  tariff  acts  of  1816,  1824, 
and  1828  more  ample  protection  was  given,  and  the  country  entered 
upon  a  career  of  unexampled  prosperity;  every  industry  prospered  and 
the  Treasury  was  full. 

This  policy  was  stricken  down,  at  the  demand  of  the  South,  by  the 
act  of  1832,  which  provided  for  a  gradual  reduction  of  duties,  and  which 
as  gradually  brought  on  a  crisis  which  culminated  in  1837  in  the  great- 
est commercial  crash  the  country  ever  witnessed.  The  suffering,  low 
wages,  and  low  prices  produced  a  political  revolution,  and  the  Whig 
party  came  in  power  in  1840  pledged  to  re-enact  a  protective  system, 
a  promise  it  redeemed  in  1842.  Again  the  country  began  to  recover 
from  ita  business  prostration  and  to  prosper. 

But  under  the  promise — at  least  in  Pennsylvania — to  maintain  the 
tariff  of  1842,  the  Democratic  party  carried  the  Presidential  election  of 
1844,  and  again-struck  down  the  protective  tariff  system  and  checked 

DOLTH— — 3 


18 

the  prosperity  of  the  country.      The  gref\t  commercial  crisis  of  1857 
was  a  lei;itimate  result  of  the  Deraucratic  tarifl'  policy. 

The  Republican  party  came  into  power  in  1861,  and  the  protective 
polity  came  to  the  Iront.  I  need  not  describe  the  wonderful  prosperity 
of  this  country  under  the  policy  adopted  and  maintained  by  the  Re- 
publican party.  It  has. been  without  a  parallel  in  the  history  of  the 
world.  Our  growth  in  wealth,  in  population,  in  resources  has  been 
constant  and  rapid,  resulting  in  the  improved  condition  of  every  class 
of  our  citizens. 

HOW  I>OES  THB    CONDITION    OF  THK    AMERICAN    FAKMEE    COMPAEB    WITH    THB 
CONDITION  OF  THK  FAKMEB  IN  FKEE-TKADE  COUNTRIES  T 

It  did  not  occur  to  the  .Senator  from  Indiana  when  he  was  painting 
the  condition  of  the  poor  and  the  depression  of  the  farming  interests 
in  contrast  with  the  luxury  and  splendor  of  the  rich,  and  advocating 
tari^  for  revenue  only  as  a  remedy  for  this  inequality,  to  tell  us  what 
had  been  the  effect  of  free-trade  where  it  had  been  tried;  whether  it 
had  there  secured  employment  for  the  laboring  classes  and  filled  their 
homes  with  comfort. 

England  is  the  great  free-trade  country,  and  the  Senator  would  have 
done  better  to  have  told  us,  in  his  splendid  oratory,  of  the  blessings 
which  free- trade  had  conferred  on  the  laborer  and  the  poor  there,  rather 
than  to  have  drawn  on  his  imaginaton  for  the  blessings  tariff  for  reve- 
nue only  would  confer  upon  the  same  classes  here:  before  he  charged 
the  present  depression  of  the  farming  industries  in  this  conntry  to  the 
protective  system,  it  would  have  been  instructive  and  would  have  helped 
to  arrive  at  correct  conclusions  to  have  considered  how  free-trade  haa 
affected  the  farmer  in  England  and  her  dependencies. 

For  forty  years  the  tariff-for-revenixp-only  policy  has  been  tried  in 
England,  and  during  the  whole  period  the  condition  of  the  lalx)ring 
classes  has  been  growing  comparatively  worse.  If  the  system  has  ben- 
efited any  class  it  has  been  the  rich.  It  has  promoted  the  accumula- 
tion of  wealth  in  the  hands  of  the  few  and  prevented  its  distribution 
among  the  many.  The  wealth  of  the  favored  classes  has  been  wrung 
by  the  employers  of  labor  from  the  labor  of  the  poor,  and  has,  in  tnm, 
been  wrung  Irom  them  by  the  bankers,  brokers,  and  financiers.  It  has 
promoted  the  interests  of  four  millions  of  capitalists  at  the  expense  of 
thirty  millions  of  workers. 

In  the  present  condition  of  England  we  have  an  object-lesson  we 
would  do  well  to  study.  On  one  side,  four  millions  of  capitalists,  titled 
aristocracy,  with  wide  country  seats  devoted  to  parks  and  game  pre- 
serves; with  magnificent  baronial  castles  filled  with  costly  works  of  art; 
stables  filled  with  horses  which  have  never  been  used  in  any  useful  or 
profitable  employment,  and  are  better  cared  for  every  day  than  the 
thirty  millions  of  human  beings  who  are  ground  into  the  earth  to  sup- 
ply all  this  magnificence;  bankers  who  go  on  from  day  to  day  adding 
bond  to  bond  and  stock  to  stock,  who  loan  their  millions  to  kings  and 
control  kingdoms  by  their  wealth;  four  millions  who  live  in  luxury 
such  as  no  similar  number  of  men  in  any  other  country  in  ancient  or 
modem  times  ever  lived,  squandering  olten  in  vice  the  gains  wrung 
from  labor  under  the  uneqal  and  unnatural  industrial  system  of  Great 
Britain. 

If  my  friend  from  Indiana  had  chosen  to  picture  their  great  wealth, 
their  baronial  castles,  their  festive  boards,  and  their  splendid  equipages, 
their  extravagances  and  their  vices,  what  a  field  it  would  have  been  for 
his  rhetoria     But  let  us  turn  to  the  other  side  of  the  picture. 

DOIaPH 


19 

Thirty  millions  of  people,  millions  of  whom  were  once  prosperous 
fiirmers,  small  traders,  employers  of  labor,  well-to-do  merchants,  and 
day-Jaborers,  under  the  system  which  placed  their  labor  in  competition 
with  the  labor  of  the  world,  have  been  growing  poorer  and  poorer,  and 
their  condition  has  gone  from  bad  to  worse.  The  harvest  of  the  system 
is  thirty  millions  out  of  thirty-four  millions  of  people  who  dwell  in  poT- 
erty  and  starvation  and  rags.  There  are  among  them  one  million  of 
paupers;  millions  who  are  half  clothed;  millions  out  of  employment, 
while  Jburteen  millions  find  employment  for  but  a  portion  of  the  time 
only,  and  work  for  starvation  wages  at  that. 

If  my  friend  from  Indiana  had  wanted  examples  of  business  depres- 
sion, of  poverty,  syualor,  and  wretchedness  from  which  to  draw  con- 
clusions as  to  the  relative  merits  of  the  American  system  of  protection 
and  the  Britiiih  system  of  iree  trade,  he  could  have  found  them  in  free- 
trade  Elngland,  and  if  he  had  wanted  an  illustration  of  what  Great 
Britain  would  make  this  country  if  she  had  the  power  to  force  her 
economic  theories  upon  us,  he  could  have  found  it  in  Ireland.  Does 
England  advocate  free  trade  for  the  United  States  from  unselfish  mo- 
tives? Do  her  rich  manufacturers  maintain  agents  and  circulate  their 
free- trade  literature  in  this  country  for  our  good  ?  No;  England  would 
like  to  monopolize  the  worksliops  of  the  world,  and  make  the  people 
of  all  other  nations  hewers  of  wood  and  drawers  of  water. 

All  remember  how,  when  President  Cleveland  seat  his  free-trade 
message  to  Congress  and  the  Mills  bill  was  reported  in  the  House,  the 
whole  press  of  Englaud  and  iScotland  teemed  day  after  day  and  week 
after  week  with  eulogies  of  President  Cleveland:  how  they  heralded 
the  message  as  in  the  interest  of  free  trade;  how  they  predicted  pros- 
perity for  their  depressed  and  languishing  industries  if  the  Cleveland 
policy  should  prevail  in  the  United  States.  It  is  for  her  own  interest, 
or  rather,  I  should  say,  in  the  interest  of  the  governing  classes,  that 
she  advocates  free  trade.  It  is  with  the  hope  of  breaking  down  the 
manufacturing  and  commercial  industries  of  other  nations  and  pro- 
moting her  own. 

In  a  speech  which  I  made  in  the  Senate  on  the  12th  of  March,  1888, 
I  had  a  passage  read  from  the  speech  of  an  English  free-trader  concern- 
ing the  controversy  between  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain  over 
the  Oregon  Territory.  My  apology  lor  repeating  it,  if  one  is  needed, 
is  its  peculiar  interest  for  the  people  of  the  Northwest.     I  then  said: 

SHALI,  ENGI.ASrD  CONQUTEE  THE  OREGON  TERRITORY   BY   FREE  TRADE  ? 

The  present  conspiracy  against  tho  material  interests  of  the  Pacific  coast  re- 
minds me  of  the  remarltable  utterances  of  an  English  statesman,  Mr.  Pox, 
nearly  forty-three  years  ago,  at  Covent  Garden  Theater,  London,  April  9,  1845, 
in  difloussinfc  the  Oregon  controversy,  during  President  Polk's  administration, 
when  the  rallying  cry  for  political  parties  whs  "54°  40'  or  fight."  I  ask  the  Sec- 
retary to  read  this  remarkable  prediction  of  Mr.  Fox. 

The  Presiding  Officer  (Mr.  Hiscock  in  the  chair).  The  Secretary  will  read 
as  requested. 

The  Secretary  read  as  follow^s : 

"Quarrel  about  this  I  Why,  we  might  just  as  well  be  invited  by  Pee!  and 
Polk  to  fight  about  mountains  in  tlie  moon. 

"But  let  men  liavesoinetliitigtodo  with  it;  let  those  who  have  found  no  pref- 
erable home  go  there  and  see  what  elTect  they  can  uroduce  upon  the  best  por- 
tions of  the  soil ;  as  tlieir  numbers  increase  and  their  exertions  tell  it  will  soon 
become  more  valuable.  And  when  man  hiis  occupied  it,  when  industry  has 
.driven  its  car  of  peaceful  conque>it  around  the  borders  of  that  vast  land,  when 
towns  have  arisen  and  cities  appeared  with  their  thronging  numbers,  when 
the  Rocky  Mountains  are  tunneled  and  rail  and  canal  have  united  the  Atlantio 
and  Pacific,  when  the  waters  of  the  Columbia  swarm  with  steam-boats,  why, 
then  will  be  the  time  to  talk  of  tlie  Oregon  territory ;  then,  without  a  regiment 
«r  llne-of-battle  ship,  without  bombarding  any  town  whatever,  free  trade  will 

DOLFH 


20 

conquer  the  Oregron  territory  for  ua,  and  will  conquer  the  United  States  iot  mm 
also  as  £ar  as  it  is  desirable  either  for  us  or  for  them  that  there  should  be  ai^ 
conquest  whatever  in  the  case.  Free  trade  will  establish  there  all  the  inaisraJtk 
of  conquest.  When  iheir  products  oome  here,  and  those  of  our  industry  return, 
there  will  be  scarcely  a  laborer  upon  the  pine  forest  that  he  is  clearing  but  'wiu 
wear  upon  his  back,  to  his  very  shirt,  the  livery  of  ilanchester.  The  knife  with 
'which  he  carves  his  grame  will  have  the  mark  of  Sheffield  upon  its  blade  as  a 
testimony  of  our  supremacy.  Every  handkerchief  waved  upon  the  banks  of  the 
Missouri  will  be  the  waving  of  an  English  banner  from  Spitalfields.  Throughout 
the  country  there  will  be  marks  of  our  skill  and  greatness,  and  tribute  paid  for  us 
received  not  by  warriors  or  governors,  not  coming  directly  into  the  national 
treasury,  but  flowing  into  the  pockets  of  the  indu.strious  and  toiling  poor,  refresh- 
ing trade  and  enriching  those  who  pursue  it,  giving  them  an  imperial  heritage 
beyond  the  wide  Atlantic  Why,  they  will  be  conquered,  for  they  will  work 
for  us;  and  what  can  the  conquered  do  more  for  their  masters?  They  will 
rrow  corn  for  us,  they  will  grind  it,  and  send  us  the  flour;  they  will  fatten  pigs 
for  us  upon  the  peaches  of  their  large  wooded  grounds ;  they  will  send  us  what- 
ever they  can  produce  that  we  want,  and  without  asking  us  to  put  our  hand 
in  our  pocket  in  order,  by  taxation,  to  pay  a  governor  there  for  quarreling 
with  their  representatives,  or  soldiery  to  bayonet  their  multitudes.  There  it 
nothing  upon  earth  worthier  the  name  of  empire  than  this;  this  is  a  noi>ler 
kind  of  dominion,  less  degrading  both  for  the  one  party  and  for  the  other,  less 
debasing  than  any  sovereignty  that  was  ever  won  by  armies,  and  being  so  won, 
reluctantly  swayed  by  scepters." 

Mr.  DoLPH.  This  passage  has  heretofore  appeared  to  be  a  piece  of  brilliant 
oratoryj  the  oflspring  of  a  vivid  imagination.  It  now,  in  view  of  the  recom- 
mendations of  a  Democratic  administration  and  the  action  of  a  majority  of  the 
Ck>mmittee  on  Ways  and  Means  of  the  House,  seems  almost  like  the  voice  of 
prophecy,  and  it  begins  to  look  as  if  the  Cobden  Club,  re-enforced  by  the  ad- 
ministration, is  about  to  succeed  in  conquering  Oregon,  destroying  her  wool  in- 
terest, and  bringing  to  pass  the  event  predicted  by  Fox,  when  there  wUl  be 
scarcely  a  laborer  in  Oregon,  not  only  in  the  pine  forests  that  he  is  clearing,  but 
in  the  valleys  and  on  the  hillsides  he  Is  tilling,  but  will  wear  on  bis  back  to  his 
very  shirt  the  costly  livery  of  Manchester,  and  that  to  be  paid  for  in  wheat  at 
SO  cents  per  bushel  laid  down  in  Liverpool. 

Mr.  President,  the  more  the  boasted  prosi)erity  of  England  under  free 
trade  is  examined  the  clearer  will  it  appear  to  be  the  prosperity  of  the 
privileged  ckisses,  a  prosperity  measured  by  the  increasing  fortunes  of 
her  millionaires,  by  the  bank  accounts  of  the  rich,  by  the  luxuries  which 
inherited  fortunes  and  fortunes  wrung  from  the  laboring  classes  insure 
to  them.  Her  system  of  political  economy  has  destroyed  agriculture, 
has  driven  many  important  industries  from  the  country,  has  thrown  a 
large  proportion  of  her  population  out  of  employment  and  driven  them 
to  more  prosperous  countries.  Not  only  is  the  prosperity  of  4,000,000 
of  her  population  secured  at  the  expense  of  the  other  30,000,000,  but 
»t  the  expense  of  her  dependencies  wherever  they  have  not  rebelled 
•gainst  the  system,  and  at  the  expense  of  other  and  weaker  nations 
wherever  she  could  succeed  by  diplomacy  or  force  in  destroying  their 
industrial  interests  to  buUd  up  her  own. 

But  as  even  the  rich  can  not  long  prosper  when  labor  is  unemployed, 
when  agriculture  is  depressed,  when  other  industries  are  paralyzed,  it 
was  inevitable  that  a  time  should  come  when  the  depression  caused  by 
free  trade  should  become  universal.  To-day  the  English  capitalist 
finds  it  difficult  to  employ  his  capital  in  England,  and  foresees  that 
there  is  bound  soon  to  be  a  breaking  up  of  the  present  system,  that  » 
day  of  reckoning  is  at  hand,  and  he  is  casting  about  for  some  safe  and 
profitable  field  for  investment,  ^trange  as  it  may  appear,  free-trade 
English  capitalists  are  investing  their  surplus  millions  in  this  country, 
where  labor  is  protected  against  the  cheap  labor  and  cheap-labor  pro- 
ducts of  England.  Millions  of  dollars  of  British  capital  which,  under 
a  system  of  political  economy  that  would  foster  industries  and  give  em- 
ployment to  home  labor  would  be  invested  in  England,  are  being  iu- 
Tested  in  the  United  States.     English  capitalists  with  free  trade  droro 


21 

English  artiflaiu  and  English  laborers  to  protected  America,  and  wer* 
themselves  driven  there  to  find  employment  for  their  capital. 

Every  great  industry  in  the  United  States  which  has  been  bnilt  up 
by  the  maintenance  of  the  American  system  of  protection,  and  which 
has  given  employment  to  American  citizens  in  our  towns  and  cities, 
and  thus  created  a  home  market  for  the  products  of  the  farm,  is  to-day 
being  examined  by  agents  of  English  capitalists  with  a  view  of  being 
purctiased  by  English  syndicates.  Several  important  industries  of  th« 
United  States  within  the  past  year  have  been  transferred  to  British 
owners.  I  saw  a  statement  not  long  since — I  know  not  what  founda- 
tion there  may  be  for  it — that  a  syndicate  of  English  capitalists  were 
negotiating  for  the  purchase  of  the  salmon  canneries  on  the  Columbia 
River  with  a  view  of  controlling  the  cannery  business  in  Washington 
and  Oregon.  All  this  shows  that  at  last  free  trade,  by  destroying  many 
industries  of  England,  has,  in  its  depressing  effects,  reached  the  men 
who  have  heretofore  been  benefited  by  it,  and  is  driving  them  for  the 
employment  of  their  capital  out  of  Great  Britain,  as  it  has  heretofore 
driven  millions  of  artisans  and  laborers  from  England  and  Ireland  to 
find  employment  elsewhere  for  their  labor. 

THB   HANDWRITING  ON  THB  WAXI,. 

The  Senator  from  Indiana  predicted  that  the  handwriting  is  on  the 
wall  foreshadowing  the  downfall  of  the  protective  system.  On  th« 
contrary,  let  me  tell  him  that  the  decree  is  already  written  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  near  future  for  the  abandonment  by  Great  Britain  of  her 
nonsensical  and  suicidal  economic  system,  and  that  with  that  will  fall 
the  whole  fabric  of  free  trade,  which  is  to-day  only  supported  by  Eng- 
land and  her  Crown  colonies,  which  have  no  power  to  impose  duties 
for  their  own  protection.  To  prove  that  I  have  not  overdrawn  the  pict- 
ure of  the  condition  of  England  under  free  trade,  I  will  quote  from 
an  English  writer  whose  burning  and  eloquent  words  will  show  f.  at 
he  possesses  the  requisite  knowledge  and  ability  to  enable  him  to 
speak  with  certainty  as  to  facts  and  to  draw  correct  conclusions  from 
them.  He  is  not  one  of  the  thirty  million  reduced  to  poverty  and  pau- 
perism by  free  trade;  he  belongs  to  the  aristocratic  ibur  million.  But 
his  eyes  have  been  opened  to  see  the  iniquities  of  a  system  which 
has  produced  such  sad  results  in  England,  his  ears  are  open  to  the  cries 
of  distress  that  come  up  for  relief  from  every  quarter  of  the  United 
Kingdom,  and,  in  the  interest  of  humanity,  inspired  by  patriotism,  he 
has  voiced  the  wrongs  of  his  countrymen.  I  hold  in  my  hand  a  pamphlet 
entitled  "A  Forbidden  Subject;  or,  Protection  to  British  Industry," 
by  Sir  Edward  Sullivan,  Bart.  I  wish  the  rules  of  the  Senate  permit- 
ted me  to  incorporate  in  my  remarks  the  suggestive  cut  upon  the  first 
cover,  which  represents  the  British  Lion  securely  chained  in  a  barrel 
labeled  "  Free  trade;"  his  taU,  protruding  through  a  hole,  is  twisted 
into  a  knot  on  the  outside  to  further  secure  his  safe  confinement,  while 
above  him,  sailing  in  cloudless  skies  in  freedom  and  sunshine,  is  a  bird, 
which  I  suppose  represents  the  American  Eagle. 

Nowhere  have  I  seen  the  questions  of  free  trade  and  protection  pre- 
sented with  greater  terseness  and  pungency  than  in  this  pamphlet 
Nearly  every  sentence  is  a  text.  The  subject  is  discussed  in  a  series  of 
short  essays  under  the  following  titles : 

"A  forbidden  subjeet."  "Near  is  my  shirt,  but  nearer  is  my  skin."  "Tli« 
•he»p  loaf  No.  1."  " The  cheap  loaf  No.  2."  "The  necklace  of  Siva."  "Gen- 
eral employment."  "Is  England  to  go  out  of  tillage?"  "Sham."  "Shrink- 
age." '  The  logic  of  facts."  "Prosperity  by  arithmetic."  "Protection."  "A 
five-shilling  dufy  on  corn."     "The  burning  question."     "  The  capital  of  labor." 

SOLPH 


22 

I  wish  every  voter  in  the  United  States  had  a  copy  of  this  pamphlet 
that  he  might  read  the  barouet's  eloquent  plea  on  behalt  of  the  30,- 
000,000  workers  in  England  for  protection,  and  their  protest  against 
the  ftx)]ish  free-trade  policy  of  England,  and  that  he  might  learn,  what 
is  the  fact,  that  there  is  a  serious  growing  sentiment  and  movement  in 
England  against  that  policy.  I  propose  to  incorporate  in  my  remarks 
quotations  from  some  of  these  essays,  that  they  may  reach  some  of  the 
formers  and  laboring  men  of  my  State. 

Under  the  title  of  "  A.  Forbidden  Subject,"  the  baronet  says: 
We  know  perfectly  well  that  very  many  of  us  are  in  our  faeart«  thinking 
scandal  of  "free  trades"  praying  for  higher  prices,  though  we  know  that  highor 
prices  can  only  coue  with  protection. 

******* 

Yes,  there  are  actually  idiots  g;oing  about  the  county  talking  scandal  alx>ut 
free  trade — and  I  am  one  of  them — and  this  is  what  I  say :  That  after  forty  years' 
experience  of  one-sided  free  trade  the  condition  of  labor  in  the  United  Kingdom 
Is  very  alarming.  That  many  industries  have  died  out,  or  removed  to  other 
countries;  that  in  nearly  every  industry  English  labor  is  undersold  by  foreign 
labor;  that  in  most  industries  four  days  is  now  considered  a  week's  work.  That 
agricultural  wages  are  dropping  to  a  point  never  beiore  reached ;  that  in  many 
eountlea  the  laborers  are  competing  for  work  at  10?.  and  9s.  a  week.  That,  in 
spite  of  excessive  cheapness,  there  are  millions  in  the  country  who  only  taste 
fresh  meat  once  a  week,  or  once  a  fortnight,  and  milk  never.  That  the  pauper 
class  number  7,000,000  in  a  population  of  34,000,000.  That  there  are  14.500,000  of 
the  community  receiving  less  thanlOi.  6d,  perweek.  That  flesh  and  bloodnever 
was  so  cheap;  the  sweating  system  never  so  crueL  That  land  Ls  rapidly  going 
ont  of  cultivation.  That  every  year,  with  a  rapidly  increasing  population,  we 
»Te  growing  less  food.  That  agriculture  in  all  its  branclies  is  rapidly  declining;. 
That  whilst  our  lands  are  going  out  of  tillage,  those  who  are  ready  and  anxious 
to  till  them  are  standing  idle. 

That  land-owners,  tenant.s,  laborer.^,  county  tradesmen  represent  10,000,000  or 
12,000,000  directly  or  indirectly  dependent  on  agriculture.  That  agriculture, 
the  growing  of  food  for  the  people,  must  always  he  the  mo.st  important  interest 
in  every  community.  That  of  all  the  ways  in  which  capital  can  be  employed, 
asri'^ulture  is  by  far  the  most  advantageous  to  society.  That  no  equal  capital 
puts  into  motion  so  much  productive  labor  as  that  of  "the  farmer.  That  to  im- 
pose conditions  under^vhich  the  land  can  noi  be  cultivated  is  devising  the  most 
gigantic  "lock-oul"  ever  conceived.  That  the  United  Kingdom  is  the  only 
country  in  the  world  that  is  going  out  of  tillage.  That  everywhere  else,  in 
Prance,  in  Glermany,  Belgium,  tillage  is  extending.  That  to  advocate  a  return 
from  tillage  to  grazing  is  like  advocating  a  return  from  express  trains  to  stage 
wagons.  That  tillage  produces  eight  limes  the  amount  of  human  food,  employs 
three  times  the  amount  of  human  labor  that  grazing  does.  That,  therefore,  the 
return  from  tillage  to  grazing  means  the  emigration  of  one-half  of  the  popuh^ 
Uon.    That  all  production  that  does  not  pay  its  cost  ceases. 

That,  therefore,  if  growing  food  does  not  jiay  its  cost,  it  w^ill  cease.  That  em- 
ployment, not  cheapness,  is  the  mainspring  of  national  prosperity  and  content- 
ment. That  the  way  to  make  a  nation  happy  and  prosperous  is  to  give  every- 
body an  opportunity  of  being  employed.  That  the  idea  of  supplying  a  popula- 
tion of  34,(XX),000  with  everything  at  a  lower  price  than  they  can  produce  it  is 
probably  the  most  preposterous  nonsense  th.it  ever  entered  the  human  mind. 
That  this  is  actually  what  free  tr^e  pretends  to  do;  we  are  attempting  to  sup- 
ply ourselves  with  everything  chfeaper  than  we  can  produce  it.  That,  in  other 
words,  we  place  before  our  workers  cheap  food,  but  put  it  out  of  their  power  to 
earn  the  money  to  buy  it.  That  there  is  hardly  an  article  in  the  world  that  can 
not  be  produced  cheaper  in  some  other  countrj-  than  in  England.  That  freight 
and  transport  are  so  cheap  that  nearly  everj-thing  will  now  pay  the  cost  of 
trans)>ort  to  England.  That,  owing  to  her  insular  position,  surrounded  on  all 
•Idea  by  ports  and  harbors,  England  is  more  vulnerable  to  industrial  invasion 
than  any  country  in  the  world.  That,  owing  to  the  extravagant  and  unthrifty 
ebaracter  of  her  people,  England  is  the  one  country  in  the  world  that  requires 
to  protect  its  labor. 

That  it  is  impossible  the  price  of  labor  can  be  maintained  in  the  face  of  the 
labor  competition  of  the  whole  world.  That  England  is  now  suffering  from  in- 
dostrial  invasion.  That  foreign  labor  is  driving  out  English  labor,  as  the  browu 
rat  has  driven  out  the  black  rat.  That,  as  it  U  the  duty  of  the  Government  to 
protect  us  from  an  armed  invasion,  so  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Government  to 
protect  us  from  an  industrial  invasion.  That  an  armed  invasion  means  tempo- 
tmry  disgrace — that  an  industrial  invsion  means  ruin.  That  protection  means 
protection  to  labor,  protection  to  native  industry,  protection  to  those  who  eai 


23 

ttieir  bread  in  the  sweat  of  their  face.  That  free  trade  means  untaxed  forelpa 
competition.  Thatforeiffn  competition  means  compf.tition  in  cheapness;  com- 
petition in  cheapness  means  competition  in  cheap  livbor;  competition  in  cheap 
labor  means  competition  in  flesh  and  blood ;  and  comp-tition  in  flesh  and  blood 
is  slavery.  That  excessive  competition  is  the  greatest  curse  that  can  be  im- 
I)osed  on  a  workino;  community.  That  the  unrestricted  labor  competition  of  tha 
wholeworldisrapidly  making  the  conditions  of  English  labor  impossible.  That 
cheap  clothing  and  cheap  food  are  of  no  value  if  human  labor  is  cheaper  slilL 
That  excessive  cheapness  isof  no  value  to  the  community  without  employment 
That  employment  means  cheapness.  That  those  ■who  have  employment  can 
buy.     That  those  who  have  notemployment  can  not  buy. 

That  the  first  and  paramount  duty  of  every  Government  is  to  encourag* 
conditions  under  which  every  one  can  find  employment.  That  we  import 
manufactures  and  export  manufacturers;  import  agricultural  produce  and  ex- 
port agricultural  laborers;  export  stron;  men  and  import  helpless  paupers. 
That  to  advocate  emigration  with  our  fields  untilled,  and  7,000,000  of  our  popu- 
lation half  clothed  is  monstrous.  That  board  of  trade  returns  are  mere  flap- 
doodle, the  food  of  fools.  That  foreign  imi)orts  and  foreign  exports  alone  are 
no  proof  of  national  prosperity.  That  internal  production  and  internal  con- 
■amption  are  the  only  proofs  of  national  prosperity.  That  free  trade  has  ruined 
Ireland,  and  proteotion  alone  can  restore  it  to  prosperity  and  contentment. 
That  the  cheapest  countries  are  those  most  unfavorable  to  labor.  That  free 
trade  means  cheapness  to  the  rich,  the  idlers,  those  with  fixed  incomes ;  but 
longer  hours,  lower  wages,  harder  work  to  the  workers.  That  the  workers  are 
twenty  to  one  to  the  idlers,  and  therefore  free  trade  sacrifices  the  interests  of 
the  nineteen  to  the  interests  of  the  one. 

That  in  no  other  community  in  the  world  hastb6  Government  ventured  to  im- 
pose the  tyranny  of  unrestricted  foreign  competition  on  the  workers.  That  for- 
eign competition  cheapens  everything  the  working  classes  produce,  but  cheap- 
ens nothing  they  consume  except  food.  That  protection  raises  the  price  of  one 
»rt!cle  they  consume,but  also  raises  the  price  of  everything  they  produce.  That 
higher  prices  for  what  they  produce  means  higher  wages,  less  grinding  competi- 
tion, a  higher  standard  of  life.  That  five  shillinga  spent  on  the  produce  of  Eng- 
lish labor  benefit*  the  working  class  more  than  fifty  shillinga  spent  on  the  pro- 
duce of  foreign  labor.  That  it  does  not  follow  we  eat  more  corn  because  we 
import  more  corn ;  we  may  grow  less.  That  it  does  not  follow  we  consume  more 
Bilks  because  we  import  more,  if  we  give  up  producing  silks.  That  it  is  home 
trade  enriches  the  working  classes.  That  2.'j.00(j,000 of  the  population  depend  on 
the  supply  and  demand  of  home  trade.  That  they  consume  no  foreign  articles 
whatsoever.  That  it  is  manifestly  unjust  as  between  class  and  class  to  make 
everything  the  poor  produce  artificially  cheap.  Thatin'ieed  the  tendency  ought 
to  be  the  other  way;  that  the  agricultural  classes  are  the  best  customers  of  the 
manufacturing  classes.  That  they  consume  no  foreigrn  man  factures.  That, 
with  the  exception  of  food,  foreign  competition  does  not  cheapen  one  single 
article  the  working  classes  consume ;  as  a  rule  they  consume  entirely  goods  of 
English  manufacture.  That  when  the  agricultural  classes  are  doing  well  they 
buy  ;  that  when  they  are  doing  badly  they  "  do  without."  That  the  wealth  of 
»  nation  is  the  value  of  what  it  produces.  That  under  foreign  competition  the 
value  of  everything  we  produce  is  decreasing  every  year.  That  to  say  that 
■under  these  conditions  we  are  getting  richer  is  absurd.  That  every  year  the 
balance  of  foreign  trade  is  £100,iX)0,000  against  us.     This  has  to  be  paid. 

Economists  may  argue  until  they  are  black  In  the  face  how  it  is  paid;  it  does 
not  signify  2d. ;  it  has  to  be  paid  somehow.  That  one-sided  free  trade  is  a 
game  of  heads  I  loose,  tails  you  win.  That  every  one  is  getting  poorer  who 
deals  in  labor,  and  every  one  is  richer  ■who  deals  in  money.  That  unrestricted 
foreign  competition  is  so  evidently  destructive  of  the  vested  interests  and  rights 
of  labor  that  out  of  England  no  single  statesman  has  ever  considered  it  worth 
»  moment's  consideration.  That  in  America  the  working  classes  believe  to  a 
man  that  in  England  the  aristocracy  have  forced  free  trade  on  the  ^vorking 
classes  In  order  that  they  may  buy  their  foreign  luxuries  cheap.  They  can  not 
conceive  that  any  w^orkingcomrannitycan  be  such  fools  astoinvite  unrestricted 
foreig^n  competition,  that  is  killing  their  industries  and  driving  them  out  of 
their  country.  That  thirty-nine  fortieths  of  mankind  look  upon  free  trade  as 
absolute  nonsense,  unworthy  a  moment's  serious  consideration.  That  it  is  only 
a  question  of  the  majority. 

If  5,000  desire  protection  and  20,000  do  not  it  is  a  monopoly.  If  20,000  desire  it 
and  5,000  do  not  it  is  common  sense.  When  the  majority  are  for  proteotion,  pro- 
tection is  right;  when  the  majority  are  against  protection,  protection  is  wrong. 
ThiU  free-traders  conceal  the  truth  from  the  working  classes.  They  tell  them 
that  labor  is  in  a  worse  condition  in  America,  France,  Germany,  and  Belgium 
than  it  is  in  England,  which  is  not  true.  They  tell  them  that  under  any  cir- 
euiiistances  they  can  beat  the  foreigner,  which  is  not  true.  They  do  not  tell  them 
that  under  protection  the  wages  in  France,  Belgium,  and  Germany  have  nearly 

DOLPH 


24 

doubled.  Thai  forty  ye&ra  ago  these  countries  had  no  manufacturing  industries; 
that  DOW  they  are  teeming  with  them.  That  flfly  yeara  ago  America  had  no 
manufacturing  industry  whatever;  that  now  she  supplies  the  entire  wants  of 
50,W0,000  of  i>eopIe,  besides  exporting  every  wliere.  They  do  not  tell  them  that 
in  every  country  in  the  world,  except  England,  agriculture  is  progreasiug.  They 
do  not  tell  them  that  for  every  sovereign  that  was  in  circulation  forty  years  ago 
there  are  three  sovereigns  to-day.  Tliat  It  is  the  increased  circulation  of  gold 
and  the  spread  of  steam — not  England  removing  her  Import  duties — that  have 
caused  tbe  increased  trade  of  the  world.  They  do  not  tell  them  that  English 
laborers,  with  14;?.  a  week  (it  onght  to  be  30».),  can  not  grow  wheat  as  cheaply  as 
Indian  ryots,  with  2».  a  week.  That  English  operatives,  working  fifty-two 
hours  for  25".,  can  not  produce  as  cheaply  as  French,  German,  or  Belgian  op- 
eratives, working  seventy  hours  for  20«.  The  working  classes  do  not  know  tho 
truth,  and  those  who  want  their  votes  have  not  the  courage  to  tell  them. 

If  English  consumers  are  to  bo  supplied  by  foreign  producers,  how  are  Eng^ 
lish  producers  to  live?  How  can  they  buy  if  they  have  not  got  any  money? 
and  how  are  they  to  get  any  money  if  they  don't  earn  any  wages?  and  how  ar» 
they  to  earn  any  wages  if  they  don't  get  any  work?  ilow  can  they  cousum.© 
unless  they  first  produce?  Did  the  folly  of  man  ever  conceive  more  suicidal 
nonsense  than  a  scheme  for  supplying  an  industrial  community  of  34,000,000 
with  everything  they  consume  from  abroad  cheaper  than  they  can  produce  It 
themselves?  It  is  simply  a  scheme  for  depriving  our  working  men  of  work. 
Itisonly  political  economists  run  riot  whocould  have  conceived  it. 

The  foolish  fellow  in  the  fable  who  pulled  down  his  chimneys  and  bricked  up 
his  fire-places  because  the  almanac  told  him  it  was  June  was  a  wise  man  oom- 
pared  to  those  who  throw  olT  their  coats  in  order  to  keep  warm  and  encoursgo 
<^eap  labor  in  order  to  keep  up  high  wages. 

Let  me  repeat  the  proposition.  If  ail  industrial  community  insists  uponbelnf( 
supplied  with  everything  it  consumes  cheaper  tlian  it  can  be  produced  at  home, 
there  will  soon  be  no  work  for  that  community  to  do.  It  must  leave  the  coun- 
try or  starve.  It  was  always  a  certainty  that  directly  our  workers  realized  tho 
fact  thai  the  foreigners  wei;e  taking  tlie  bread  out  of  their  mouths  they  would 
call  for  protection.  Well,  that  time  has  come,  and  they  do  realize  it.  The  in- 
stinct of  self-preservation  is  awakened,  and  it  is  possible  they  may  make  it  very 
hot  for  those  who  have  so  long  been  leading  them  astray  from  the  paths  of  com- 
mon sense.  Industrial  depres^sion  has  been  so  long  reaching  wages  tliat  people 
begran  to  fancy  it  would  never  reach  them  at  all.  But  it  has.  The  great  indus- 
trial boom  put  it  off  ten  years,  but  at  last  it  has  come. 

The  cause  of  the  delay  is  very  simple.  Up  to  the  present  time  the  Immense 
industrial  capital  of  the  country  has  stood  between  English  and  foreign  work- 
men, and  so  long  as  that  buffer  remained  the  former  did  not  feel  the  full  sboctc 
of  the  competition  with  cheap  labor;  now  it  is  gone,  and  they  are  face  to  face 
with  their  enemy.  First  tiie  employers  lost  their  profits,  then  they  lost  their 
capital,  and  now^  at  last  the  workers  are  losing  their  wages.  The  shoe  is  begin- 
ning to  pinch,  and  the  reaction  has  commenced.  It  was  a  certainty.  The  em- 
ployer may  manasre  to  live  without  his  profits;  he  may  struggle  on  even  if  he 
loses  half  his  capital;  he  hu  j  his  political  economy  to  console  him;  hut  when 
the  workman  loses  employment  he  is  done.  No  theories  will  help  him  then  ;  he 
wants  remedies,  and  very  ((uickly,  too.     It  la  a  case  of  work  or  the  workhouse^' 

Under  the  head  of  "  Near  is  my  shirt,  but  nearer  is  my  skin,"  he 


In  every  industrial  country  in  the  world  except  England  it  is  recognized  that 
the  first  duty  of  the  Government  is  to  promote  the  employment  of  the  people; 
In  other  words,  to  protect  their  industries.  In  every  other  industrial  country 
bat  England  the  industries  of  the  people  are  protected.  Is  it  so  certain  that  all 
the  whole  world  is  wrong  and  England  only  right  7  In  every  country  except 
England  it  is  allowed  that  the  interests  of  those  who  both  produce  and  consume 
are  grreater  than  the  interests  of  those  who  only  consume.  In  every  industrial 
community  out  of  England  it  is  allowed  that  employment  is  of  more  importance 
than  mere  cheapness.  In  England  alone  it  is  maintained  that  cheapness  is  of 
more  importance  than  employment.  Are  even  free-traders  infallible?  Is  there 
ftny  doubt  which  is  right?  Eraploj-ment  gives  the  means  of  buying;  cheap- 
nes.s  does  not  give  the  means  of  buying. 

The  penny  roll  is  now  down  at  a  halfpenny;  and  thousands  of  the  unem- 
ployed would  be  much  better  off  with  the  peimy  roll  at  twopence  if  they  had 
twopence-halfpenny  to  buy  it  with.  When  a  cry  goes  up  from  the  unemployed 
in  England  it  is  met  by  an  assi^rance  from  the  Cobden  Club  that  workmen  %tm 
Car  worse  off  in  foreign  countries.  The  information  I  have  gathered  on  this  sub- 
ject with  much  care  satisfies  me  that  this  statement  is  absolutely  untrue ;  that  it 


26 

is,  In  fact,  the  actual  reyerse  of  the  truth.  There  is  industrial  distress  in  other 
oountriea,  no  doubt,  but  nothins;  like  the  industrial  distress  that  exists  In  Eng- 
land. There  is  this  icanaense  difterence :  Other  nations  suffer  chiefly  from  th« 
results  of  their  own  overproduction,  whereas  England  suffers  from  the  orer- 
production  of  the  whole  world. 

Under  the  title  of  "Cheap  loaf  Xo.  2,"  he  saya: 

It  ia  Important  for  Bnglishmen  to  understand  this  one  grreat  fact,  that  a  popiK 
lation  of  34,000,000  of  people  inhabiting  a  country  of  77,000,000  of  acres,  with  »U 
the  resources  of  civilization,  and  with  the  cheapest  coal  and  iron  in  the  world, 
with  still  working  capital  left,  a  good  climate,  a  splendid  aeacoast,  can  w^ith  th« 
greatest  ease  supply  all  its  food  and  all  its  manufactured  requirements,  pro- 
vided the  people  wish  to  work ;  if  they  won't  w^ork,  cadet  qusRslio;  but  they  are 
like  other  workers  all  over  the  world — they  will  work  if  the  conditions  of  labor 
are  sufficiently  favorable;  if  they  are  not,  they  will  not  work.  The  farmers 
will  till  their  fields  if  Vhey  can  make  a  proiit  by  doing  so;  if  they  can  not,  they 
will  let  them  lie  fallow.  Those  who  tell  Englishmen  they  can  not  supply  their 
wants  in  agricultural  and  manufactured  produce  tell  them  what  is  not  true. 

Our  total  imports  (1879)  were  £378,000,000.  If  we  were  to  return  to  the  practice 
of  common  sense,  and  of  "  civilized  mankind,"  and  admit  duty  free  tea,  coffee, 
cocoa,  sugar,  tobacco,  that  we  can  not  produce  at  home,  and  put  a  high  duty 
on  all  foreign  luxuries,  wine,  spirits,  and  on  all  agricultural  and  manufactured 
produce  that  interfere  with  employment  at  home,  we  should,  if  the  importa- 
tion continued,  relieve  our  taxation  to  the  extent  of  £30,000,000  a  j-ear;  or,  if  the 
Importation  ceased  and  we  produced  these  articles  ourselves,  we  should,  with- 
out exaggeration,  add  £60,000,000  or  £70,000,000  directly  and  indirectly  to  the 
wage-earning  class  of  the  community.  Now,  this  is  no  exagKeration.  The 
nijchtmare  of  one-sided  free  trade,  in  which  England  has  given  away  every- 
thing and  received  nothing  in  return,  is  passing  away.  The  sleeper  is  already 
half  awake,  and  asking  himself  uneasily,  "Is  this  true  or  is  it  only  a  dream?" 
Alas!  it  isho  dream.  May  the  awakening  be  complete  and  soon  ;  itcannotbe 
too  soon. 

Under  the  caption  of  "  Necklace  of  Siva,"  he  says: 

From  (^ape  Comorin  to  Cashmere  the  credulous  IQndoo  bows  himself  before 
the  great  god  Siva,  the  destroyer.  From  the  land's  end  to  John  O'Groat'a 
House  the  credulous  operative  bows  himself  before  the  great  god  Competition, 
the  destroyer.  The  Siva  of  the  Hindoo  is  a  cruel  god,  adorned  with  a  necklace 
of  skulls,  and  propitiated  with  oblations  of  blood  and  human  sacrifices.  The 
Siva  of  the  British  operative  is  also  a  cruel  god,  adorned  with  a  necklace  of 
skulls,  and  propitiated  with  the  life  blood  of  many  niiliious  of  workers. 
«  «  «  *  *  «  « 

Of  course,  competition  must  come  in  this  industrial  world  ;  but  woe  to  those 
who  add  competition  to  competition  till  the7e  is  no  place  left  for  the  worker. 

In  the  fierce  struggle  for  gold,  and  the  fiercer  struggle  for  life,  the  weak,  of 
course,  will  go  to  the  wall  and  get  crushed  and  trodden  under  foot.  All  I 
ask  of  political  economists  is  to  devise  laws  that  shall  minimize  the  number  of 
those  that  must  fall  in  the  industrial  strife,  not  laws  that  multiply  it  The 
g:reatest  benefactor  to  industrial  mankind  is  the  legislator  or  economist  who  di- 
minishescompetition,  and  the  greatest  cursQ  to  industrial  mankind  is  the  one 
who  artificially  increa.ses  it.  "  But,"  say  our  instructors,  "  competition  is  not  a 
cruel  god  that  delights  in  a  necklace  of  skulls,"  etc.  Let  us  see.  A  wretched 
woman  stitches  shirts  at  id.  a  dozen,  her  very  life  all  the  time  passing  through 
her  fingers  into  her  work.  "  You  must  look  alive,  my  good  woman,"  says  the 
slopniaster;  " you  must  stitch  a  good  deal  harder  than  you  have  done  if  you 
wish  me  to  employ  you.  I  have  been  paying  you  4rf.  a  dozen  for  stitching  these 
shirts,  but  now  I  find  I  can  get  them  stitched  as  well  in  Belgrium,  Saxony,  and 
Italy  for  3c/.  per  dozen.     You  must  do  tliem  for  3d.  a  dozen  or  lose  my  work." 

"But  I  can't  stitch  them  for  Sd.  a  dozen,"  answers  the  poor  woman ;  "already 
I  stitch  sixteen  hours  a  day,  often  more ;  my  fincrers  are  sore :'  I  have  to  pay  for 
jiy  light  and  for  my  needles  and  thread,  and  all  I  can  earn  is  3s.  6d.  per  week. 
I  will  try  to  stitch  cheaper,  I  will  indeed;  but  for  God's  sake  don't  take  away 
my  work,  or  I  starve."  "  I  am  very  sorry,"  says  the  slopmaster,  who  realizes  her 
misery,  "  but  what  can  I  do7  Business  is  business,  competition  is  so  severe  that 
I  must  have  the  cheapest  labor.  If  shirts  can  be  stitched  for  3d.  a  dozen  abroad 
I  must  get  them  stitched  for  3d.  a  dozen  at  home  or  lose  the  trade."  And  so  an- 
other skull  is  added  to  the  necklace  of  Siva.  The  same  with  chainmakers  or 
nailmakers,  "  Now,  then,  my  man,"  we  say  to  the  foreman  or  gangman, "'  yo» 
aaost  make  these  women  and  children  of  yours  work  harder  than  they  have 
been  doing.  I  find  I  have  been  paying  you  too  much.  I  can  get  the  work  done 
cheaper  abroad."  "But,"  says  the  gangmaster,  "I  can't  get  any  more  work  out 
of  them.  I  work  them  as  long  as  the  law  allows  me,  and  longer,  too ;  and  If 
you  look  at  them  I  think  you  will  see  by  their  appearance  that  I  do  not  allow 
them  to  waste  their  time." 


26 

"Well,  I  don't  know  anything  about  that;  all  I  know  is  that  unless  yon  can 
supply  me  with  chain.i  and  nulls  cheaper  than  you  have  done  I  shall  l»e  obliged 
to  buy  my  chains  and  my  naila  abroad."  And  so  there  is  another  turn  of  the 
■crew  and  more  skalls  added  to  the  necklace  of  Siva.  Sooner  or  later  the  com- 
p«tltioa  for  cheapness  becomes  competition  in  cheap  labor,  and  competition  in 
eheap  labor  means  competition  in  flesh  and  blood.  Klesh  and  blood  is  plenty, 
pennies  are  scarce,  and  therefore  th'5  holders  of  the  pennies  have  the  game  in 
their  hands.  They  get  a  great  deal  of  flesh  and  blood  for  their  pennies.  And 
Oien  fleAh  and  blood  ha.s  no  cluim  on  them;  they  have  not  to  replace  it.  Ifou 
bay  your  horse,  and  if  you  work  him  to  death  you  must  buy  another,  but  you 
do  not  buy  the  women  who  stitch  your  shirts,  or  your  ch.'iiu-makers,  or  your 
nail -makers,  or  those  who  make  cheap  clothes  in  the  sweating  den.  They  cost 
you  no  money.  If  they  worked  themselves  to  death  it  is  no  loss  to  you ;  a  hun- 
dred others  are  always  ready  to  take  the  vacant  place.  When  men,  women, 
and  children  can  work  no  more  they  go  to  the  hospital  or  the  workhouse  to 
die,  probably  to  many  of  them  the  happiest  hours  of  their  poor,  joyless  lives, 
to  learn,  perhaps,  alas,  too  lat<^,  that  there  are  conditions  under  which  lif*  is 
worth  living.    But  does  it  signify?    Who  cares? 

"Rattle  his  bones  over  the  stones; 
It's  only  a  pauper,  that  nobody  owns." 

It's  only  a  few  more  victims  on  the  altar  of  competition,  a  few  more  sknlla 
added  to  the  necklace  of  Siva.  This  is  not  the  fault  of  the  employers  of  labor. 
They  may  be,  and  very  likely  are,  as  kind-hearted  as  their  neighbors,  bat  they 
have  no  choice.  It  is  the  fault  of  those  vain  theorists  who  have  artificially  stim- 
ulated oompetition  until  the  conditions  of  labor  have  become  fatal. 

In  his  essay  on  "  Greneral  employment "  he  says: 

The  prosperity  of  an  industrial  community  like  England  may  be  summed  up 
in  the  two  words,  general  employment.  General  employment  means  content- 
ment, sobriety, self-respect,  and  the  general  progress  and  improvement  of  the 
working  classes.  The  want  of  it  means  the  very  reverse  of  all  this.  General 
employment  is  of  fargjeater  importance  to  an  industrial  community  than  cheap 
food ;  the  cheapest  food  will  bo  dear  if  there  are  no  earnings  wherewith  to  pur- 
chase it.  It  is  of  far  mor^  importance  than  cheap  luxuries.  It  is  of  far  more 
moment  to  the  community  that  the  producing  class  should  have  general  em- 
ployment, should  be  able  to  earn  wages  to  keep  themselves  and  those  depend- 
ing on  them  in  health,  comfort,  and  respectability,  than  that  the  owners  of 
realized  and  fixed  inoomes  should  be  able  to  buy  their  luxuries  at  a  somewhat 
cheaper  rate. 

Under  the  title  of  "I?  England  to  go  out  of  tillage? "  he  says: 

"Are  you  apprised,"  said  Grattan,  ninety  years  ago,  in  one  of  his  magnificent 
orations,  "  tluit  the  population  of  Ireland  is  not  less  than  6,000,000,  and  that  a 
great  proportion  of  that  number  are  people  contiected  with  tillage?  If  you 
go  out  of  tilLtge,  what  ^vill  you  do  w^ith  that  population  ?  "  We  can  answer 
Gr  ittan's  inquiry.  Since  he  spoke  one-third  of  Ireland  has  gone  out  of  tillage, 
an'l  one-third  of  her  population  has  left  the  country;  and  at  her  present  rate  of 
decrease  a  few  years  will  see  one-third  of  England  also  gone  out  of  tillage,  and 
one-third  of  her  population  lea  re  the  country.  England  and  Ireland  are  going 
ont  of  tillage.  That  is  the  terrible  truth  I  wish  to  bring  home  to  the  convic- 
tion of  all  thinking  people.  Why  are  they  going  out  of  tillage?  For  the  very 
simple  reason  that  tillage  does  not  pay,  because  the  value  of  the  article  pro- 
duced is  not  equal  to  the  cost  of  producing  iu 

Under  the  title  of  "Sham  "  he  says: 

After  all,  the  whole  question  with  the  working  classes  is  one  of  wages.  What 
on  earth  do  they  oare  for  theoriesof  political  economy,  for  .\.dam  Smith,  or  Mill, 
or  Cobden,  or  iiright,  except  as  guides  to  a  "  better  land  ?  " 

The  cost  of  agricultural  produce  is  everywhere  more  than  anything  a  case 
of  wages,  and  when  we  are  urging  our  agricultural  classes  to  produce  corn  as 
cheap  as  it  can  be  produced  in  India,  in  America,  Wallachia,  Egypt,  Turkey, 
Poland,  etc.,  w^eare  urging  them  to  do  what,  with  their  present  r.»te  of  wages, 
is  impossible.  In  India,  agricultural  wages  are  lid.  a  day;  in  Turkey,  Egypl, 
the  shores  of  the  Bdltio,  about  3d.  or  id.  In  America  and  Canada  daily  wages 
we  very  high;  but  agricultural  labor  is  only  employed  four  months  in  the  year. 
The  farmer  only  employs  labor  to  plow  and  sow  the  seed  and  harvest  the  crop. 
Directly  harvest  is  over  he  sends  his  corn  to  the  nearest  depot,  locks  up  the 
tmrm,  and  all  bands,  himself  very  often  included,  go  oflT  into  the  forest  lumber- 
ing till  summer  comes  again.  We  say  to  our  farmers,  "  You  most  grow  wheat 
In  competition  with  Poles,  Turks,  Ryots,  Fellahs,  Wallachians."  Supposethey 
were  to  answer,  "  Well,  we  can  do  so  if  we  have  labor  at  lid.  a  day,"  wb«l 
would  our  economists  say  then?  They  want  to  have  their  cake  and  to  sat  it 
too.    They  want  high  wages  and  cheap  produce,  but  this  is  i:oM^'<««iVtle, 

DOLPH 


27 

And  under  "  Shrinkage  "  he  says: 

Norw,  what  do  the  working  classes  really  want?  They  want  their  industrial 
liv-a  to  be  brighter,  gayer,  more  hopeful,  less  laborious;  they  wish  to  be  pro- 
tected from  excessive  competition  ;  from  the  competition  of  underpaid  labor; 
from  competition  that  makes  their  industrial  life  intolerable  to  them,  that  lowers 
their  wages,  lengthens  their  hours  of  laLior,  destroys  their  Industry.  What  a 
■ham  it  is  to  tell  the  agricultural  laborrr  he  should  have  20s.  a  week,  and  at  the 
same  time  to  make  him  compete  witli  the  ryot  of  India,  who  gets  2«.  a  week,  or 
with  the  fellah  who  gets  3s.  What  a  sham  to  tell  the  poor  needlewoman  she 
ought  to  get  1«.  a  dozen  for  stitching  shirts,  and  at  the  same  time  to  make  her 
compete  with  the  Swiss,  or  Saxon,  or  Belgian,  who  will  stitch  them  for  3d.  a 
dozen.  The  working  classes  want  protection  to  wages,  protection  to  labor,  pro- 
tection to  industries,  protection  from  "  rings  "  that  artificially  increase  the  price 
of  meat,  and  flsh,  and  bread;  protection  from  adulteration,  from  false  weights 
and  measures;  they  want  a  tender  poor  law  for  the  old, the  infirm,  those  who 
can't  work,  a  hard  one  for  the  able-bodied  loafers  who  won't  work.  They  want 
free  elementary  education.  They  want  technical  education, agriculture,  horti- 
culture, farriery,  natural  hirstory  taught  in  every  school  of  the  country.  What 
the  country  re<|uires  is  legislation  that  will  before  all  things  and  in  every  way 
encourage  and  stimulate  the  employment  of  the  people;  that  will  not,  if  possi- 
ble, allow  a  single  industry  to  be  crushed  out ;  that  will  promote  the  distribu- 
tion of  wealth  instead  of  the  accumulation  of  wealth. 

In  France,  Germany,  and  America  Protection  argues  thus:  "We  have  large 
populations,  amounting  to  from  35,000.000  to50,ilOO,OOU.  Every  individual  of  this 
population  has  to  be  fed  and  clothed  and  housed  and  supplied  with  necessaries 
and  luxuries.  This  constitutes  a  a  immense  home  market.  If  we  keep  itas  much 
as  IX)»sible  to  ourselves,  stimulate  supply  to  keep  pace  with  increa.sing  popula- 
tion, exclude  foreigners,  our  workers  will  find  employment,  our  money  will  be 
employed  at  home  and  will  fructify  at  home;  whereas,  if  we  invite  foreign  sup- 
plies into  our  markets,  our  money  will  go  abroad  to  pay  foreign  labor,  and  our 
■workers  will  be  thrown  out  of  •work."  This  is  what  the  economists,  the  states- 
men, the  thinkers,  the  workers  all  say  in  France,  Germany,  Belgium,  America. 
They  proclaim  aloud  that  home  trade  is  ten  times  more  profitable  to  the  com- 
munity than  foreign  trade,  that  employment  is  of  ten  times  greater  importance 
than  mere  cheapness.  Home  trade,  they  say,  is  the  citadel  of  national  wealth 
and  prosperity.  Foreign  trade  is  the  outworks;  we  will  protect  the  citadel  first 
of  all.  "Hang  the  citadel  "  say  our  free-traders;  "  let  that  look  after  itself,  ^ve 
■»rlll  protect  the  outworks;  "  and  so  the  citadel  of  home  trade  is  neglected  in 
fikvor  of  the  outworks  of  foreign  trade,  internal  production  and  consumption 
are  put  on  one  side  in  favor  of  exports  and  imports.  But,  in  the  words  of 
Cicero,  "  Urbem  prod  lis  diirn  caslell'i  defendilis" — you  may  lose  the  city  whilst 
you  defend  the  outworks — and  we  have  done  so. 

In  England  we  have  actually  reversed  the  practice  of  all  other  nations.  We 
also  have  a  masniflcent  home  market,  a  population  of  34,000,000,  great  eaters 
and  drinkers,  and  consumers ;  every  one  of  whom  has  to  be  fed,  to  be  clothed, 
and  housed ;  but  instead  of  keeping  this  splendid  market  to  ourselves  ■we  hand 
it  over  to  th  '  foreigner.  "Come  over  and  supply  us,"  ■we  say.  "  Certainly," 
they  reply,  "but  reuiember  yon  must  not  come  over  and  supply  us."  We  not 
only  admit  them  to  our  markets  on  equal  terms,  but  ■we  actually  offer  them 
Bpeuial  advantages  in  the  way  of  cost  or  transit  to  come  ovei  and  supply  us. 
Was  there  ever  such  a  case  of  national  madness;  of  Industrial  suicide? 

Every  year  our  population  increases,  every  year  their  consumption  of  every- 
thing increases,  every  year  our,  production  diminishes,  every  year  we  spend 
less  money  on  production  at  home  and  spend  more  money  on  production  abroad. 
Are  we  mad?  I  think  so.  It  is  well  liie  country  should  realize,  if  in  the  ominous 
murmur  of  approaching  revolution  shecan  realize  anything,  that  the  process  of 
Industr  i  al  shrinkage  that  is  now  goi  tig  on  is  universal.  It  affects  every  industry, 
manufacturing  and  agricultural,  almost  without  exception.  England  is  bleed- 
ing at  every  industrial  pore.  Foreign  trade  profits  individuals,  home  trade 
profits  the  w^hole  connmunity.  The  money  that  is  turned  over  once  in  foreign 
trade  is  turned  over  ten  times  in  home  trade.  Foreign  trade  enriches  the  deal- 
ers, home  trade  enriches  the  producer.  Adozenorso  great  bankersandhi/okers 
and  financiers  and  foreigners  and  dealers  in  money  are  now  making  money, 
but  all  the  rest  of  the  community  are  losing  it. 

The  Senator  from  Indiana  proposes,  as  a  remedy  for  the  existino;  de- 
pre.ssiou  of  the  agricultural  interests  of  this  country,  a  policy  which 
has  been  the  cause  of  the  destruction  of  the  agricultural  interests  of 
Great  Britain  and  of  all  the  misery  and  wretchedness  so  vividly  and 
truthfully  portrayed  by  the  writer  of  the  foregoing  extracts. 

But  for  fear  that  it  may  be  claimed  that  the  distress  in  England  has 


28 

been  overdrawn  by  Mr.  Sullivan,  I  will  quote  briefly  from  an  official 
report  to  the  same  effect. 

I  am  indebted  for  it  to  the  speech  delivered  in  the  Senate  on  the  16th 
of  October,  1888,  by  the  junior  Senator  from  Wisconsin  [Mr.  Spooneb]. 
The  report  I  refer  to  is  a  report  from  a  commission  that  vyaa  appointed 
onthe29thdayof  August,  1885.  Ontbatdate  Victoria, "  by  the  grao* 
of  God,  of  the  United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britian  and  Ireland,  Queen, 
defender  of  the  Faith,"  issued  a  commission  to  certain  "  trusty  and 
well-beloved  cousins  and  councilors"  and  others,  numbering  twenty- 
six,  the  Earl  of  Iddlesleigh  being  the  first  and  the  Earl  of  Dunraven 
being  the  second,  the  object  whereof  is  set  forth  in  the  commission,  ai 
follows: 

Whereas  we  have  deemed  it  expedient  that  a  commission  should  fortliwith 
issue  to  inquire  and  report  upon  the  extent,  nature,  and  probable  causes  of  tt»« 
depression  now  or  recently  prevailing  in  various  branches  of  trade  and  indu*> 
try,  and  whether  it  can  bo  alleviated  by  legislative  or  other  measures. 

Sir  James  Caird,  the  senior  land  commissioner  for  England,  and  a 
great  authority,  testified  before  the  commission  to  the  continual  de- 
pression and  ruin  among  the  agricultural  cl.-isses  of  England-  After 
giving  the  result  as  to  the  diflferent  countries,  he  was  asked: 

Have  you  made  any  generalization  of  the  result? 

Answer.  Yes,  1  have.  The  present  as  compared  with  ten  years  ago  as  deduced 
by  me  from  these  figures,  which  I  have  already  given,  would  show  on  an  aver- 
age that  the  landlords  have  lost  30  per  cent.,  the  tenants  60  percent.,  and  the 
laborers  10  per  cent.,  and  putting  that  into  figurs,  itbringesoutthaton£i5.5,0<X),000 
of  rental  for  the  United  Kingdom  the  landlords'  loss  of  30  per  cent,  would  b« 
equal  to  about  £20,000,000,  and  the  tenants'  60  per  cent.,  inasmuch  as  their  incom* 
may  be  taken  at  half  the  rental,  would  be  just  the  same;  that  is  to  say, 60  per 
cent,  on  half  the  rental  is  also  £20,000,000.  With  reg^ard  to  the  laborers  there  was 
a  difficulty  in  estimating  the  amount  of  reduction,  but  I  will  place  before  joxut 
lordships  the  way  in  which  I  endeavored  to  arrive  at  it. 

The  following  is  from  the  final  report: 

With  very  few  exceptions  trade  is  reported  to  be  depressed,  and  in  many  casea 
It  is  considered  to  be  more  depressed  tnan  at  any  previous  period.  The  num- 
ber of  workmen  out  of  employment  at  the  time  when  the  answers  were  drawn 
up  showed  considerable  variation  according  to  the  districts  and  trades  to  which 
they  belonged,  but  there  appears  to  have  been  a  greater  want  of  employment 
among  the  unskilled  than  among  the  skilled  workmen.  The  rate  of  wages  for 
time  iivork  appears  on  the  whole  to  be  slightly  higher  than  the  average  of  lh« 
last  twenty  year.s,  but  it  is  not  now  at  its  hi<ihest  point.  The  rate  for  piece- 
work has  diminished  for  nearly  all  cases.  A  reduction  is  reported  in  hours  of 
work  of  from  three  to  four  hours  a  week  during  the  last  fifteen  years.  Both  th» 
quantity  and  the  quality  of  the  work  produced  have  largely  increased.  Summar- 
izing very  briefly  the  answers  w^hich  we  received  to  our  questions,  and  the  oral 
evidence  given  before  us,  there  would  appear  to  be  a  general  agreement  amonf 
those  whom  we  consulted, 

A.  "that  the  trade  and  industry  of  the  country  are  in  a  condition  which  may 
be  fairly  described  as  depressed. 

B.  That  by  this  depression  is  meant  a  diminution  and  in  some  cases  an  ab- 
sence of  prodt,  with  a  corresponding  diminution  of  employment  for  the  labor- 
ing classes. 

C.  That  neither  the  volume  of  trade  nor  the  amount  of  capital  invested  therein 
has  materially  fallen  off,  though  the  latter  has  in  many  cases  diminished  in 
value. 

D.  That  the  depression  above  referred  to  dates  from  about  the  year  1875,  and 
that  with  the  exception  of  a  short  period  of  prosperity  enjoyed  by  certain 
branches  of  trade  in  the  years  1880  to  188,3,  it  has  proceeded  with  tolerable  uni- 
formity and  has  affected  the  trade  and  industry  of  the  country  generally,  but 
more  espeoially  those  branches  which  are  connected  with  asrriculture. 

As  regards  the  causes  which  have  contributed   to  bring  about  this  state  ot 
things,  there  ^vas,  as  might  be  expected,  less  unanimity  of  opinion,  but  the  fol- 
lowing enumeration  will,  we  think,  include  all  those  to  which  any  importano* 
was  attached : 
First.  Overproduction.  ' 

Second.  The  continuous  fall  of  prices  caused  by  the  depreciation  of  the  stasd- 
ard  value. 


29 

Third.  The  effect  of  foreign  tariffs  and  bounties  and  the  restrictive  comiii«r- 
•lal  policies  of  foreign  countries  in  limiting:  our  markets. 

Fourth.  Foreign  competition,  which  we  are  beginning  to  feel  both  in  our  own 
and  neutral  markets. 

Fifth.  An  increase  In  local  taxation  and  the  burdens  of  industry  generally. 

Sixth.  Cheai)er  rates  of  carriage  enjoyed  by  our  foreign  competitors. 

Seventh.  Legislation  affecting  the  employment  of  labor  in  industrial  under- 
t*ktngs. 

Blghth.  Superior  technical  education  of  the  workmen  in  foreign  countries. 

Those  who  may  be  said  to  represent  the  producer  have  mainly  dwelt  upon 
the  restriction  and  even  the  absence  of  profit  in  their  respective  businesses.  It 
is  from  this  class,  and  more  especially  from  the  employers  of  labor,  that  the 
•omplaints  chiefly  proceed.  On  the  other  hand,  those  classes  of  the  population 
who  derive  their  income  from  foreign  investments,  or  from  property  not  di- 
rectly connected  with  productive  industries,  appear  to  have  little  unround  of 
•oiuplaint.  On  the  contrary,  they  have  profiled  by  the  reuiarkably  low  prices 
of  many  commodities. 

We  may  therefore  sum  up  the  chief  features  of  the  commercial  situation  as 
being: 

A.  A  very  serious  falling  off  in  the  exchangeable  value  of  the  produce  of  the  soil; 

B.  An  Increased  production  of  nearly  all  other  classes  of  commodities; 

C.  A  tendency  in  the  supply  of  commodities  to  outrun  the  demand; 
Ji.  A  diminution  in  the  profits  obtainable  by  production;  and 

E.  A  similar  diminution  in  the  rate  of  interest  on  invested  capital. 

The  diminution  in  the  rate  of  profit  obtainable  from  production,  whether  ag- 
ricultural or  manufacturing,  has  given  rise  to  a  widespread  feeling  of  depression 
among  all  the  producing  classes.  Those,  on  the  other  hand,  who  arc  in  receipt 
of  fixed  salaries,  or  who  draw  their  incomes  from  fixed  investments,  have  ap- 
parently little  to  complain  of,  and  we  think  that  so  far  as  regards  the  purchasing 
power  of  wages  a  siujilar  remark  will  apply  to  the  laboring  classes. 

We  are  disposed  to  think  that  one  of  the  chief  agencies  which  have  tended 
to  |)erpetuate  this  state  of  things  is  the  protectionist  policy  of  so  many  foreign 
eountries,  which  has  become  more  marked  during  the  last  ten  years  than  at 
any  previous  period  of  similar  length.  The  high  prices  which  protection  se- 
cures to  the  purchaser  within  its  protected  area  naturally  stimulate  production 
and  impel  him  to  engage  in  competition  in  foreign  markets.  The  surplus  pro- 
duction which  can  not  find  a  market  at  home  is  sent  abroad,  and  in  foreign 
markets  undersells  the  commodities  produced  under  less  artificial  conditions. 
The  natural  growth  of  the  industries  of  foreign  eountries,  possessing  in  many 
cases  the  population  and  other  resources  required  for  successful  manulacturijaK 
enterprise,  has  also  contributed  to  produce  the  same  result. 

We  have,  as  above  pointed  out,  suffered  a  serious  loss  iu  our  purchasing 
power  by  reason  of  the  deficient  or  unremunerative  character  of  the  produce  of 
the  soil.  Sir  .lames  Caird  estimates  the  los.-s  in  purchasing  power  of  the  classes 
engaged  in  or  connected  with  agriculture  at  £42,800,003  during  the  year  1885. 
and  sthe  loss  in  several  of  the  preceding  years  must  no  doubt  have  been  equal 
to  or  even  greater  than  this.  This  amount  has  been  lost  to  the  markets  in 
which  it  was  formerly  agent,  and  can  not  fail  to  have  had  an  important  influ- 
ence upon  the  demand  for  manufactured  goods. 

All  the  colonies  of  England  which  have  the  power  to  do  so  have  re- 
pudiated free  trade  and  adopted  a  protective  system.  Under  protec- 
tion the  condition  of  the  Canadian  Dominion  has  wonderlnlly  improved. 
She  calls  the  system  ' '  the  National  System. ' '  She  follows  the  example 
of  the  great  Republic,  and  hopes  to  secure  under  that  policy  some  meas- 
ure of  the  prosperity  we  enjoy.  Australia  is  also  demonstrating  the 
wisdom  and  benefits  of  a  protective  policy.  Her  industries,  which  lan- 
guished under  free  trade,  are  to-day  flourishing  under  a  tariff  which 
protects  her  people  against  the  manufacturers  of  Great  Britain.  All 
this  could  not  take  place  without  creating  doubts,  not  only  among  the 
30,000,000  workers,  but  among  the  privileged  classes  of  Great  Britain, 
as  to  the  wisdom  of  free  trade;  and,  as  I  have  said,  the  sentiment  there 
in  favor  of  protection  is  to-day  strong  and  rapidly  growing. 

Injurious  as  free  trade  has  been  to  England,  it  has  been  far  more  so 
to  her  colonies,  where  they  have  had  no  power  to  set  up  barriers  against 
her  commercial  policy. 

IKEliAITD  AITD  INTIIA. 

Ireland  and  India  illustrate  the  ruinous  effects  of  free  trade.  Th« 
•qualor  and  wretchedness  of  the  masses  of  Ireland  ex<«ed  that  of  aay 

DOLTH 


< 


30 

other  clTiIized  people  on  the  face  of  the  globe.  Her  people  flee  from 
her  borders  into  exile  to  escape  starvation;  and  yet  Ireland  is  a  fertile 
and  productive  country,  possessing  abundance  of  resources,  if  developed, 
to  sustain  all  her  people  in  comfort  and  even  luxury.  Her  people  art 
naturally  industrious  and  economical.  Ireland,  under  a  protective 
system,  has  been  made  to  bud  and  blossom  as  the  rose,  and  her  peopla 
to  prosper.  Under  such  a  system  contentment,  happiness,  and  good 
order  reigned.  All  her  poverty  and  all  her  woes  to-day  can  be  traced 
to  the  commercial  policy  of  Great  Britain.  A  w^riter,  discussing  th« 
processes  by  which  Ireland  has  been  impoverished,  says: 

Ireland  ha.<i  Rn  extremely  rich  soil  and  is  pre-eminently  adapted  to  the  raising 
of  cattle,  sbeep,  and  all  kinds  of  grain.  Slie  has  the  richest  pa.slure  laud  in 
KaropA,  ha.<<  an  abundance  of  cheap  fuel,  ia  rich  in  mineral  rcauurees,  and  haa 
many  of  the  finest  natural  harbors  in  the  world. 

The  Irish,  at  a  very  early  date,  devoted  their  attention  to  the  raising  of  cattl* 
for  Knglish  markets.  In  the  seventeenth  century  it  became  a  very  lucrative 
bosinesa  and  the  first  g^reat  source  of  Irish  wealth.  But  Parliainvnt,  in  ol>edl- 
ent-e  to  the  demand  of  England  landlords,  passed  a  law  prohibiting  the  impor- 
tation from  Ireland  of  all  cattle,  sheep,  and  swine,  of  beef,  pork,  bacon,  niuttua, 
butter,  and  cheese. 

The  source  of  Irish  industry  having  been  destroyed,  the  Irish  having  a  few 
shipfi  built  others,  and  iietook  themselves  to  commerce, establishingalarge  and 
flourishing  trade  with  the  colonies,  with  the  Kast  and  West  Indies  and  thecoa- 
tinent.  But  aj^ain  iingland  interfered,  and  Parliament,  to  please  English  ship- 
builders and  traders,  passed  the  celebrated  navigation  laws,  prohibiting  the 
Irish  from  carrying  on  trade  wiih  the  colonies,  and  thus  Ireland's  flourishing 
colonial  trade  was  cut  off  and  torever  destroyed. 

Ireland  was  now  completely  at  England's  mercy.  Forbidden  to  raise  cattle 
for  English  markets,  forbidden  to  build  up  a  merchant  marine,  forbidden  to 
trade  with  other  nations,  they  were  still  determined  to  live  on  the  beautiful  soil 
God  had  given  them.  Though  crushed  in  spirit  and  discouraged  they  still 
had  the  indomitable  pluck  so  characteristic  of  the  Irish  race,  and  they  turned 
their  attention  to  the  raising  of  sheep  and  manufacturing  wool,  and  it  soon  be- 
came a  flourishing  industry.  "Irish  wool,"  says  Froude,  "was  the  finest  In 
Europe,  and  Irish  cloth  wa«  eagerly  sought  after."  All  were  for  a  tioie  prosper- 
ous, but  England  becatne  alarmed  and  jealous  at  Ireland's  prosperity,  and  Par- 
liament again  crippled  them  by  prohibitory  laws. 

The  Irish  'wool  industry  was  wiped  out  and  ihe  ruin  was  absolute  and  couw 
plete.  At  the  time  of  the  destruction  of  the  woolen  industry  it  atforded  employe 
ment  to  fifty  thousand  families.  They  were  thrown  upon  the  land;  rents  rose 
to  a  ruinous  state;  thousands  had  no  employment,  and  those  who  had  'work 
earned  only  their  board.    Many  emigrated  to  America, 

What  did  the  Irish  do  next?  They  developed  their  fisheries,  but  as  the  iiw 
dustry  ijecame  profitable  they  were  once  more  pounced  upon  by  England,  and 
the  poor  Irish  fisherman,  blessed  tvith  an  abundance  of  fish  in  his  o^vn  waters, 
^vas  by  statute  compelled  to  fish  in  English  ships  manned  by  Knglish  sailors. 
No  wonder  the  spirit  of  the  people  was  for  a  time  broken — their  commerce 
swept  from  the  seas,  their  manufactories  closed,  their  operatives  perishing  from 
want  and  famine,  or  fleeing  to  other  countries  to  find  a  home. 

But  soon  after,  a  few  leaders  came  to  Ireland's  rescue.  Grattan,  Flood,  Chai^ 
lemont,  and  others  worked  for  this  downtrodden  people.  The  Irish  Volunteers 
'With  Grattan,  supported  by  Flood,  made  demands  of  England  which  were 
grranted,  and  once  more  Ireland  was  free.  One  of  the  first  acts  of  the  newly- 
enfranchised  legislature  was  to  introduce  measures  for  the  protection  of  Irish 
Industries  by  placing  heavy  duties  on  all  import«d  goods.  Then  sprung  up  a 
wonderful  spirit  of  enterprise,  and  soon  Ireland's  industry  and  prosperity  was 
the  greatest  she  had  ever  known.  The  island  was  dotted  over  with  busy  hives 
and  marts  of  industry.  Her  ports  were  alive  -with  commerce,  her  ships  visited 
every  sea,  her  flag  floated  in  every  port,  her  people  were  peaceful,  contented, 
and  happy;  landlord  and  tenant 'were  alike  satisfied. 

There  was  a  ready  home  market  for  produce,  and  a  continually  increasing 
demand  for  the  wares  of  the  manufacturer.  The  laborers  had  steady  employ- 
ment at  high  'wages;  they  ■were  well  fed,  comfortably  housed,  and  decently 
clothed.  This  'was  Ireland  nnder  "protection."  But,  alas,  it  could  not  latit 
long.  English  monopolists  and  landlords  could  not  brook  such  growing  pros- 
perity. Pitt  came  upon  the  scene,  and  by  one  of  the  foulest  acta  known  to  his- 
tory, Ireland  was  drawn  to  England,  and  England's  free-trade  was  forced  upon 
her.  Thus  again  was  Ireland  robbed  of  her  prosi>erity.  English  manufact- 
urers glutted  the  Irish  market,  undersold  them,  crushed  them.  Five  million 
of  operatives  were  thrown  out  of  work.  Almost  all  manufacturers  elosed  their 
doors,  and  sought  elsewhere  a  li'ving. 
DOLPH 


31 

According  to  the  Government  report,  in  1802,  the  first  year  of  EngHah  free-trad« 
under  the  "act  of  the  Union,"  there  was  a  population  of  8,000,000;  employed, 
2,000,000;  unemployed,  6,000,000.  Those  without  work  had  to  seek  it  some- 
where, and  many,  as  in  1699,  went  upon  the  land.  Rents  rose  from  one  pound 
to  ten.  There  being  no  home  consumption,  the  price  of  produce  fell  almost  to 
nothing.  The  tenants  could  not  pay  the  rent;  the  landlords  were  bankrupt; 
the  whole  island  was  in  gloom  and  despair.  Then  came  the  famine  with  all  its 
horrors — whole  families  laid  down  and  died.  Over  2,000,000  perished  by  famine 
and  2,000,000  more  came  to  America.     And  so  it  has  continued  to  this  day. 

Ireland  is  a  down-trodden  country,  and  Irishmen  at  home  are  suffering  want 
and  poverty  and  degradation,  and  simply  for  the  want  of  self-government  and 
the  right  to  adopt  and  maintain  a  protective  policy. 

Free  trade  was  forced  by  Great  Britain  upon  British  India,  and  her 
extensive  manufactures  were  annihilated,  her  factories  dwindled  away, 
her  commercial  activity  was  destroyed,  her  agriculture  impoverished. 
In  short,  like  a  blight,  free  trade  blasted  and  scorched  her  prosperity, 
made  her  a  producer  of  raw  materials  for  English  manufactures,  and 
bound  her  people  in  abject  and  hopeless  commercial  servitude  to  En- 
glish masters. 

FRANCE. 

France  has  had  for  three-quarters  of  a  century  a  protective  system, 
and  by  her  tariff  laws  the  importation  of  many  articles  is  absolutely 
prohibited,  and  as  to  others  her  duties  are  prohibitory.  Her  tariff  is 
so  comprehensive  in  its  character  that  the  smallest  industry  is  pro- 
tected and  the  largest  not  neglected. 

GERMANY. 

Germany,  on  account  of  the  alarming  depression  of  many  of  her  in- 
dustries, was  compelled  to  adopt  a  protective  policy.  A  little  over  a 
decade  of  protection  has  there  produced  the  same  beneficent  results 
that  it  has  always  produced  elsewhere;  new  life  has  been  infused  into 
old  industries;  new  ones  have  been  prospe.rou.sly  inaugurated;  wages 
have  advanced,  and  the  condition  of  her  laboring  people  has  been  greatly 
improved.  • 

I  do  not  believe  a  case  can  be  foundof  any  civilized  country  which  has 
tried  the  protective  policy  whose  prosperity  has  not  been  materially 
increased  thereby,  and  I  do  know  that,  judging  by  the  standards  by 
vhich  the  people  of  a  Republic  measure  prosperity,  there  is  not  acivil- 
ized  country  on  the  face  of  the  globe  whose  material  interests  have  been 
advanced  by  free  trade. 

THK    rSTDCSTBIES    OF    THK    COUNTKT    ARE    AT   PRESENT   VX    THE    HANDS    OF   THE 
FBrENDS  OF  THB   PROTECTIVE  SYSTEM. 

Whatever  is  done  by  Congress  at  this  session,  and  as  long  as  the  Re- 
publican party  has  a  majority  in  either  branch  of  Congress,  will  be  in 
accordance  with  that  policy.  The  friends  of  protection,  however,  ought 
not  to  be  forgetful  of  the  position  of  the  Democratic  party  upon  the 
tariff  i.ssue,  or  unmindful  of  the  consequences  of  a  victory  which  would 
enable  them  to  put  those  theories  into  practice.  A  good  illustration  of 
the  difference  between  the  policies  of  the  two  parties  is  afforded  by  the 
manner  in  which  they  propose  to  treat  two  important  productions  of 
the  country. 

wool,  AND  SUGAR. 

The  Senator  from  Indiana  and  the  party  to  which  he  belongs  propose 
to  pat  wool  on  the  free-list  and  to  maintain  a  heavy  duty  upon  sugar. 
The  Republican  party  proposes  to  maintain  and  strengthen  the  tariff 
on  wool  and  to  reduce  or  remove  the  tariff  on  sugar. 

What  would  be  the  effect  of  putting  wool  on  the  free-list? 

President  Cleveland,  Mr.  Mai»iing,  and  Mr.  Mills  all  said  it  would 
Bake  wool  cheaper,  and  they  justified  their  attempt  to  put  it  on  the  free- 


{ 


32 

list  by  the  assertion  that  it  would  make  clothing  cheaper.  But  somt 
demagogues,  during  the  last  Presidential  campaign,  at  least  in  Oregon, 
undertook  to  make  the  people  beliere  that  removing  the  duty  would 
not  decrease  the  price. 

What  fixes  the  price  of  wool?  The  same  law  that  fixes  the  price  of 
any  other  commodity— the  law  of  supply  and  demand.  The  wool  clip 
of  the  world  and  the  demand  of  the  world  govern  the  price  of  wool  in 
London,  the  great  wool  market;  and  the  price  in  the  United  States  is 
fixed,  and  has  been  for  the  last  quarter  of  a  century,  by  the  London 
price,  and  has  always  been  the  London  price  with  the  cost  of  transpor- 
tation and  duty  added,  except  when  the  customs  laws  have  been  avoided 
and  wool  imported  at  au  undervaluation.  Every  time  the  price  of 
wool  has  gone  down  in  London  it  has  gone  down  in  this  country,  and 
the  only  reason  that  it  has  not  gfine  as  low  in  this  country  as  in  London 
is  that  our  tariff  prevented  its  importation. 

There  has  been  no  free  wool  since  the  year  1816.  Duties  were  in- 
creased in  1830,  and  this  was  followed  by  an  advance  of  over  5  cents  per 
per  pound  in  the  average  price  of  American  wool.  From  1833  to  1842 
the  tariff  was  systematically  reduced  each  year.  When  this  reduction 
began  the  price  of  wool  was  61  cents  per  pound,  and  when  it  ended  the 
price  was  43}  cents,  and  the  tendency  of  prices  was  generally  down- 
ward. 

■  "VNTien  the  tariff  was  reduced  in  1883  wool  in  the  United  States  fell, 
in  anticipation  of  the  admission  of  foreign  wools  under  the  new  tariff, 
5  cents  per  pound,  although  the  reduction  in  the  duty  was  less  than 
2  cents  per  pound. 

It  is  apparent  to  every  thinking  person  that  wool-growing  in  the 
United  States  would  be  doomed  should  wool  be  placed  on  the  free-list 
or  the  tariff  on  imported  wool  reduced.  Consider  the  magnitude  of  the 
loss  which  would  ensue.  It  is  estimated  that  in  the  United  States  there 
are  700,003  wool-growers,  employing  500,000  additional  men  a.s  assist- 
ants. The  most  of  these  men  have  families,  and  there  are  probably 
4,000,000  persons  interested  in  the  industry,  about  one-fifteenth  of  our 
entire  population.  There  are  probably  150,000  more  owners  of  small 
flocks.  These  wool-growers  own  700,000  farms,  averaging  160  acres  of 
land,  or  112,000,000  acres  in  the  aggregate,  portions  of  which  are  too 
rough  to  be  cultivated,  but  are  valuable  for  sheep-raising. 

The  effect  of  putting  wool  on  the  free-list  would  be  to  make  wool-grow- 
ing unprofitable.  It  would  render  unproductive  the  rough  and  poor 
portions  of  these  seven  hundred  thousand  farms  now  used  for  grazing 
sheep;  it  would  decrease  the  value  of  the  sheep  and  of  the  wool  clip; 
it  would  decrease  the  wages  paid  to  the  employes  and  deprive  the 
farmer  of  his  profit.      I  have  seen  this  loss  put  in  this  way: 

Depreciation  of  the  value  of  land,  $2.50  per  acre „..S280, 000, 000 

Depreciation  of  the  value  of  labor 25,000,000 

Depreciation  of  the  value  of  sheep „ 25,000,000 

Depreciation  of  wool „ „ 25,000,000 

Total „ _ „ 3.55,000,000 

The  loss  on  account  of  the  price  of  wool  would  be  an  annual  and 
continuing  loss.  ^ 

The  free- traders  assert  that  if  wool  is  placed  on  the  free-list  our  man- 
ufJEicturers  can  make  their  goods  cheaper  and  send  them  into  foreign 
markets  and  successfully  compete  with  foreign  manulactnrers,  but  be- 
fore they  can  do  this  we  must  supply  ourselves,  which  we  have  not  yet 
done.  In  1887  we  imported  $45,000,000  worth  of  woolen  goods,  which 
not  only  bore  the  cost  of  transportation  but  paid  the  duties.     Iq  the 

DOLPH 


33  ; 

year  ending  June  30,  1888,  we  imported  nearly  $50,000,000  worth  of 
woolen  goods.  Before  we  can  supply  the  markets  of  the  world  we  must 
supply  our  own  market,  and  to  do  this  we  must  reduce  the  price  be- 
low the  cost  of  woolen  goods  now  sent  to  our  country  from  abroad,  and 
in  addition  pay  the  transportation  to  distant  countries.  This  we  can 
never  do  and  pay  existing  wages  to  the  laborers  who  make  the  goods 
and  existing  prices  to  farmers  who  produce  the  wool. 

The  free-traders,  while  industriously  endeavoring  to  make  the  farmer 
believe  that  he  is  unjustly  taxed  by  a  protective  tariff,  are  seeking  to  put 
wool  on  the  free-list,  which  is  one  of  the  principal  sources  of  revenue 
to  Mie  American  farmer.  Who  demands  this  sacrifice?  Not  the  wool- 
growers;  not  the  farmers;  not  the  manufacturers  who,  with  few  excep- 
tions, are  in  favor  of  according  the  wool-grower  the  same  protection  en- 
joyed by  themselves.  No  organization,  no  class  of  citizens  engaged  in 
industrial  pursuits  demands  it.  It  is  proposed  to  sacrifice  this  great  in- 
dustry for  a  theory,  upon  the  theory  that  the  members  of  the  Cobden 
Club  know  better  what  is  to  the  advantage  of  the  farmers  of  the  United 
States  than  they  know  themselves;  that  the  sugar  and  cotton  planters 
of  the  South  know  better  what  is  good  for  the  laboring  men  of  the 
North  than  they  know  themselves. 

It  is  said  free  wool  will  reduce  the  price  of  clothing.  So  far  at  least 
as  the  price  of  the  poor  man's  clothing  is  concerned  this  is  untrue. 
Clothing  is  cheaper  to-day  in  the  United  States  than  ever  before  in  the 
history  of  this  country;  the  laboring  man  can  now  buy  more  and  better 
clothing  with  the  product  of  a  month's  labor  than  ever  before.  The 
fact  is  that  the  domestic  competition  in  a  nation  of  60, 000, 000  of  peo- 
ple, with  skilled  artisans,  with  improved  machinery,  and  a  long  and 
constant  demand  of  the  best  market  on  the  face  of  the  globe,  has  re- 
duced the  cost  of  plain  clothing  to  the  lowest  living  prices.  But  con- 
sider how  trifling  the  effect  of  the  tariff  on  wool  must  be  on  the  price 
of  a  suit  of  clothes.  There  are  from  3  to  5  pounds  of  wool  in  a  suit  of 
clothes.  The  average  duty  is,  say,  10  cents  per  pound.  The  price  of 
the  wool  in  a  suit  of  clothing  would,  until  our  wool  industries  were 
destroyed  and  our  sheep  driven  to  the  slaughter-pen,  be  decreased  from 
30  to  50  cents  per  suit,  but  as  soon  as  our  wool  industry  was  destroyed 
it  would  be  largely  increased. 

The  fact  is  that  the  wool  which  is  in  a  suit  of  clothes  ia  but  a  small 
part  of  its  cost  After  the  wool  is  prepared  for  market  by  the  grower 
there  is  the  home  buyer  with  his  commissions,  the  wool  broker  with 
his  charges,  transportation,  storage,  insurance,  the  manufacture  of  the 
cloth,  the  profits  of  the  wholesale  and  retail  merchants  who  handle  the 
cloth  before  it  reaches  the  manufacturer  of  clothing;  the  manufacturer 
of  the  clothing,  the  wholesale  merchant  and  the  retail  merchant  who 
sell  the  clothing,  with  their  profit.  Undertake  to  trace  this  30  or  50 
cents  reduction  in  the  price  of  the  wool  which  is  used  in  making  a  suit 
of  clothes  from  the  wool-grower  until  it  comes  back  to  him  in  clothing, 
and  how  much  would  be  returned  to  him?  You  might  as  well  expect 
to  irrigate  your  garden  by  pouring  a  pail  of  water  on  a  mountain  top 
10  miles  away,  as  to  expect  to  see  the  visible  effects  of  cheaper  wool 
under  free  trade  in  cheaper  clothing.  Then  only  a  small  proportion 
of  the  laborer's  wages  is  expended  for  woolen  clothing. 

No  complaint  has  ever  been  heard  from  the  laboring  man  about  the 
price  of  clothing,  and  American  laborers  and  their  families  are  better 
clothed  to-day  than  ever  before  in  the  history  of  this  country,  and  bet- 
ter than  the  laboring  men  of  any  other  country  on  the  face  of  the  earth 
at  this  or  any  other  time  in  the  history  of  the  world.     The  crusade 

DOLPH 3 


against  the  protective  tariff  on  wool  is  conducted  by  the  free-trader 
upon  a  deceptive  plan.  He  tells  the  tarmer  that  free  trade  will  in- 
crease the  price  of  wool  and  benefit  him;  he  assures  the  manufacturer 
that  it  will  decrease  the  price  of  wool  and  benefit  him;  the  laboring 
man  that  it  will  cheapen  clothing  by  foreign  importation,  and  the  manu- 
facturer that  he  can  make  goods  cheaper  and  thus  keep  out  the  for- 
eigner and  be  enabled  to  find  a  market  abroad;  while  at  the  same  time 
importers  and  foreign  manufacturers  are  intriguing  and  subscribing 
funds  to  place  wool  on  the  free-list.  If  they  succeed  some  one  will  be 
cheated,  and  it  will  not  be  the  importers  or  foreigners.  Clothing  will 
not  be  perceptibly  cheapened.  The  power  of  the  farmers  and  laboring 
men  to  purchase  will  be  reduced,  the  demand  for  home  consumption 
diminished,  foreign  importations  greatly  increased,  and  home  produc- 
tion decreased. 

For  a  period  of  nearly  forty  years  a  heavy  duty  has  been  imposed 
upon  imported  sugar  in  the  interest  of  the  sugar-planters  of  the  South. 
More  than  a  thousand  millions  of  dollars  has  been  during  that  time 
paid  by  the  consumers  of  sugar  in  the  United  States  to  swell  the  profits 
of  sugar-planters,  who  for  a  portion  of  the  time  raised  their  cane  and 
manufactured  their  sugar  with  slave  labor,  and  since  the  war,  owing 
to  the  peculiar  conditions  in  the  South,  have  carried  on  business  with 
the  poorest  paid  labor  in  the  United  Stales,  and  yet  the  production  of 
sugar  in  the  United  States  is  chiefly  carried  on  in  Louisiana,  and  is  now 
only  about  half  as  large  as  it  was  in  1862.  The  tariff  has  not,  owing 
to  the  peculiar  conditions  in  the  South,  developed  the  sugar  industry 
in  the  United  States,  and  to-day,  while  we  consume  one-fourth  of  the 
sugar  manufactured  in  the  world,  and  more  than  one-fourth  of  our  en- 
tire revenue  from  customs  duties  is  derived  from  the  duty  on  sugar,  we 
raise  less  than  one- tenth  of  the  sugar  we  consume. 

How  can  we  account  for  the  fact  that  the  advocates  of  tariff  reform 
propose  to  place  wool,  lumber,  vegetables,  fruit,  and  other  articles,  the 
production  of  Northern  States,  upon  the  free-list,  and  to  retain  the 
enormous  duty  on  sugar  ?  Is  it  because  the  sugar  industry  is  an  industry 
of  the  South,  the  support  ef  which  is  indispensable  to  the  Democratic 
party,  that  Louisiana  demands  protection  for  it,  and  the  Democratic 
party,  North  and  South,  dare  not  refuse  to  comply  with  her  demand  ? 
There  can  be  no  other,  conclusion. 

In  order  to  reduce  the  surplus  $5,000,000  and  to  reduce  taxation,  if 
it  be  admitted  the  consumer  pays  the  duty,  83^  cents  per  capita  upon 
an  estimated  population  of  60,000,000,  the  Democratic  party  pro- 
poses to  put  wool,  which  is  a  profitable  industry  in  almost  every  North- 
em  State,  upon  the  free-list,  in  order  to  sustain  a  tax  of  $58,000,000 
upon  imported  sugar,  which  is  a  necessity  to  every  household  in  the 
Union,  and  thus  taxing,  if  the  duty  be  a  tax  upon  the  consumer,  all 
the  people  of  the  United  States  96 1  cents  per  capita  annually  to  protect 
a  few  sugar-planters  in  Louisiana. 

The  duties  paid  upon  imported  wool  have  averaged  about 41  percent.; 
the  duty  on  sugar  as  the  law  now  stands  is  83  per  cent. 

There  is  another  thing  in  this  connection  worthy  of  note.  The  wool 
industry  not  only  is  an  important  industry  in  nearly  every  Northern 
State,  but  it  gives  employment  to  white  laborers,  to  the  laborers  who 
are  not  only  citizens  of  the  United  States  in  name,  but  in  fact,  who  are 
independent  and  intelligent,  whose  votes  count  for  as  much  in  the  con- 
trol of  public  affairs  as  the  votes  of  the  millionaires;  men  who  work  or 
decline  to  work  as  interest  or  caprice  dictates;  men  who  constitute  the 
Tery  foundation  upon  which  the  superstructure  of  our  political  fabric 


35 

T«8ts — the  farmer,  the  herder,  and  the  shearer,  who  all  share  in  th© 
profits  of  the  business. 

But  the  profits  of  the  sugar  industry  in  Louisiana  and  other  Southern 
States  go  alone  to  the  planters.  The  men  who  plant  and  cultivate  and 
harvest  and  crush  the  cane  are  free  only  in  theory,  they  are  citizens 
only  in  name,  they  enjoy  only  such  civil  rights  as  the  dominant  class 
chooses  to  accord  to  them.  As  to  political  rights,  they  are  permitted 
to  exercise  none  where  their  votes  would  afifect  the  result.  They  must 
■work  for  such  wages  as  are  offered.  They  are  not  even  allowed,  in 
many  cases,  to  freely  dispose  of  the  wages  earned.  They  are  compelled 
to  taie  it  in  barter,  and,  between  low  wages,  excessive  profits  of  the 
planter,  and  interest  paid  to  the  employer,  the  laborer  receives  only 
starvation  wages.  If  they  combine  for  an  improvement  of  their  condi- 
tion, strike  for  better  wages,  they  are  forced  into  submission. 

The  protection  afforded  by  the  tariff  on  imported  sugar,  on  account 
of  the  peculiar  social,  business,  and  political  condition  of  the  South, 
is  in  no  sense  a  tariff  to  protect  American  labor,  but  a  tariff  which 
tax«3  60,000,000  of  people  at  the  rate  of  nearly  $1  per  capita  annually 
to  enrich  a  few  men,  many  of  whom  tried  to  destroy  the  Union  in  order 
to  construct  upon  the  ruins  of  the  fabric  a  Confederacy,  the  comer-stone 
of  which  should  be  slavery  and  free  trade,  and  who  now,  disregarding 
the  Constitution  and  laws  of  the  United  States,  are  depriving  the 
former  slaves  of  their  political  rights  and  have  reduced  them  to  a  con- 
dition little  better  than  slavery. 

Let  me  make  another  suggestive  comparison.  The  bulk  of  the  cane 
sugar  is  raised  in  Louisiana;  all  the  balance  of  the  domestic  product  is 
raised  in  two  or  three  Southern  States.  It  is  all  the  product  of  the  South. 
There  were  in  1887  only  9, 241 ,  440  sheep  in  the  thirteen  Southern  States; 
of  these  4,761,831  were  in  Texas,  The  total  number  of  sheep  in  the 
Tlnited  States  is  44,759,314.  The  total  number  of  sheep  in  the  South- 
em  States  is  only  about  one-fifth  of  the  whole  number  in  the  United 
States.  The  three  Pacific  CoastStates  have  more  sheep  than  the  thirteen 
Southern  States.  New  Mexico  has  nearly  as  many  sheep  as  Texas,  while 
California  exceeds  Texas  by  about  2,000,000. 

THS  StrKPLUS  EEVBNTTE. 

The  surplus  revenue  has  been  exaggerated — magnified  for  political 
purposes — to  advance  the  free-trade  policy.  For  this  purpose  appropria- 
tions demanded  by  public  necessity  and  in  the  interest  of  economy  have 
been  withheld.  Money  has  been  hoarded  in  the  vaults  of  the  Treasury 
or  deposited  with  favored  banks  which  should  have  been  used  in  carry- 
ing on  public  improvements  and  paying  off  the  interest-bearing  debt. 
In  some  remarks  I  made  in  the  Senate  on  December  21,  1887, 1  called 
attention  to  the  fact  that  the  surplus  revenues  were  being  overstated 
and  to  some  objects  of  national  and  public  importance  to  which  the 
surplus  could  be  profitably  applied.  If  Congress  had  then  adopted  a 
policy  which  would  have  distributed  among  the  people  the  surplus  reve- 
nues, after  providing  for  the  sinking  fund,  by  expenditures  for  the  im- 
provement of  rivers  and  harbors,  the  erection  of  necessary  public  build- 
ings, the  survey  of  the  public  lands,  and  the  construction  of  coast 
defenses,  it  is  more  than  probable  that  the  present  stringency  of  money 
and  consequent  depression  of  the  farming  interest  would  not  have  arisen. 

The  senior  Senator  from  Connecticut  [Mr.  Hawley]  the  other  day 
presented  in  the  Senate  a  statement  of  the  estimated  probable  revenues 
and  appropriations  for  the  next  fiscal  year.  I  will  incorporate  it  in 
my  remarks.     It  is  as  follows: 

Estimated  revenues,  &45O,40O,OO0.  That  includes  post-oflSce  revenues.  Per 
torUra,  probable  appropriations,  exclusive  of  deficiencies,  8333,000,000;  perm»- 

DOLPH 


3G 

nent  appropriations,  including;  sinking  fund,  $101,600,000;  probable  deficiency— 
a  guess,  but  a  guess  from  ttie  best  judges  of  wliat  it  will  be — $31,000,000.  That 
makes  on  the  other  aide  $155,600,000.  But  add  proposed  appropriations  reported. 
to  the  Senate  and  not  included  in  probable  deficiency — return  of  direct  tax, 
$17,500,000,  which  we  have  passed  and  sent  to  the  other  House ;  Blair  bill,  57,000,- 
000;  French  spoliation  claims,  which  the  courts  have  adjudged  that  we  owe, and 
we  owe  as  truly  as  we  oweour  board  bills,  §1,7-12,000;  navalships,  $7,000,000;  in- 
creased pensions,  835,000,000,  as  the  committee  has  told  you  here.  This  ag^gre- 
gate  makes  SC8,2i2,0()0,  and  added  to  $155,600,000  it  makes  proposed  appropria- 
tions S523,842,000.  The  estimated  revenues  being  S150, 400.000,  there  ia  in  view  a 
probable  deficit,  if  tliat  be  anything  like  truth,  of  $73,4i2,000. 

This  statement  does  not  include  all  the  proposed  appropriations.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  Blair  bill  has  probably  been  defeated  for  this  C!on- 
gress,  and  it  is  not  likely  that  some  of  the  other  appropriations  will 
be  made,  at  least  to  the  amount  stated.  But  some  of  them  will  be, 
inclTiding  the  item  for  pensions,  and  it  is  possible  that  some  of  the  esti- 
mates will  be  exceeded.  These  figures  are  worthy  of  the  attention  of 
those  who  are  immediately  intrusted  with  the  tariff  legislation,  and 
of  those  who  are  demanding  a  great  reduction  of  the  revenues. 

HOW  ABB  PEN3IOK3  TO   BE  PAID  IP  THE  TBEASUKY  IS   DEPLETED? 

The  Senator  from  Indiana,  after  advocating  a  revenue  policy  which 
would  inevitably  impoverish  the  country,  empty  the  Treasury,  and 
prevent  any  further  increase  of  pensions  and  of  the  list  of  pensioners, 
and  after  enumerating  certain  measures  which  he  supposed  would  rem- 
edy the  existing  agricultural  depression,  said: 

In  the  interest  of  the  farmer  I  would  add  a  liberal  policy  of  pensions. 

And  adds: 

But  for  the  large  sums  which  for  years  have  been  distributed  by  the  Pension 
Office,  and  thus  reached  nearly  every  neigliborhood  in  the  United  States  and 
gone  into  general  circulation,  the  present  financial  crisis  among  the  farmers  and 
laborers  would  have  come  at  an  earlier  day. 

I  am,  the  party  to  which  I  belong  is,  and  the  members  of  the  Senate 
on  this  side  of  the  Chamber  are  in  favor  of  recognizing  the  just  claims 
of  the  men  who,  when  the  Union  was  assailed,  the  national  existence 
threatened,  and  republican  institutions  imperiled  in  the  interest  of 
human  slavery,  carried  the  flag  to  victory,  overthrew  the  great  rebell- 
ion, and  saved  the  Union.  We  are  in  favor  of  caring  for  them  in  their 
old  age  and  decrepitude,  and  for  their  widows  and  orphans,  not  as  a 
charity  to  them,  but  as  the  discharge  of  an  obligation.  Their  necessi- 
ties and  just  claims  should  be  the  measure  of  our  response  to  their  de- 
mands. Whatever  is  just,  whatever  is  equitable,  whatever  is  dictated 
by  patriotism  and  grateful  recognition  of  the  services  of  the  Union  sol- 
diers should  be  done,  even  if  it  should  become  necessary  to  increase  tax- 
ation and  the  public  debt. 

But  it  appears  to  me  that  the  argument  that  distributing  the  public 
revenues  among  the  people  in  the  way  of  liberal  pensions  is  a  public 
blessing,  is  the  weakest  of  all  the  arguments  in  favor  of  pensions.  The 
same  argument  may  be  made  in  lavor  of  other  expenditures  of  the 
revenues  tor  public  purposes.  The  Republican  party,  while  it  favors 
just  and  liberal  pensions  for  the  Union  soldiers,  and  would  discharge 
every  obligation  to  them  and  to  those  dependent  upon  them,  is  in  favor 
of  maintaining  sufficient  revenues  to  enable  the  obligations  of  the  Gov- 
ernment to  them  to  be  met,  knowing  that  if  large  disbursements  are  to 
be  made  for  pensions  the  ability  of  the  Government  to  meet  them  must 
be  maintained. 

KIVEB  AJfD   HARROB  IMPROVEMESTS. 

This  reference  to  the  suggestion  of  the  Senator  from  Indiana,  of  lib- 
eral pensions  for  the  relief  of  the  farmer,  is  made  in  part  as  an  intro- 
duction to  something  I  desire  to  say  in  regard  to  another  expenditure 


37 

of  public  monej's,  which  not  only  distributes  them  among  the  people, 
and  thus  benefits  the  farmer,  but  is  of  direct  and  lasting  benefit  totho 
farmers  and  producers  of  the  country,  but  which,  like  increased  appro- 
priations for  pensions,  can  not,  or  at  least  will  not,  be  made  unless  the 
Government  maintains  a  tariff  policy  which  affords  a  sufiicient  revenue 
for  the  purpose.  Already  what  is  termed  the  extravagance  of  Congress, 
both  in  regard  to  pensions  and  appropriations  for  rivers  and  harbors,  is 
being  denounced  in  and  out  ot  Congress,  and  it  is  evident  that  the  con- 
dition of  the  Treasury  is  to  be  used  as  an  argument  against  large  ap- 
propriations for  these  purposes. 

How  does  the  improvement  of  rivers  and  harbors  benefit  the  farmer  ? 
Experience  has  demonstrated  that  water  routes  are  the  only  effectual 
cheapeners  and  regulators  of  railroad  charges.  The  tendency  is  to  the 
consolidation  of  railroad  lines;  and  what  are  intended  as  competing 
lines  of  railroad  when  constructed  often  become  parts  of  existing  sys- 
tems, and,  instead  of  cheapening  freight  charges  and  proving  beneficial 
to  the  liarmers  and  consumers,  only  add  to  their  burdens.  But  wherever 
railroad  lines  come  in  competition  with  free  and  unobstructed  water 
ways  no  combination  is  possible,  and  the  cheapest  water  transportation 
becomes  the  rate  for  transportation  by  rail  as  well. 

The  cost  of  transportation  is  an  onerous  tax  upon  producer  and  con- 
Brmer,  and  it  is  the  part  of  wise  statesmanship  to  endeavor  to  reduce 
it  to  the  minimum  by  improving  and  utilizing  the  great  water  ways 
which  nature  has  abundantly  provided  for  us  in  such  a  way  as  to  pro- 
mote the  freest  competition  in  our  internal  carrying  trade.  We  have 
a  grand  system  of  water  transportation,  which  is  already  of  incalcula- 
ble value  to  the  people,  which  should  be  adequately  improved  by  the 
General  Government.  It  is  time  we  realized  that  we  have  a  great 
country,  great  in  territory,  in  resources  and  possibilities  for  the  future, 
and  by  wise  legislation  help  to  lay  broad  and  deep  the  foundations  of 
our  future  prosperity. 

The  farmers  and  producers  have  come  to  understand — at  least  in  the 
State  I  have  the  honor  in  part  to  represent — that  the  money  expended 
for  the  improvement  of  rivers  and  harbors  is  spent  directly  for  their 
benefit;  that  river  competition  and  improved  harbors  will  lessen  the 
cost  of  transportation,  and  that  whatever  does  this  increases  the  price 
of  everything  they  have  to  sell  and  lessens  the  cost  of  everything  they 
have  to  buy.  They  have  learned  by  disappointing  experience  that  in- 
sufficient appropriations,  instead  of  being  economical,  are  wasteful  and 
extravagant.  The  less  the  cost  of  transportation  the  more  the  producer 
receives. 

The  market  price  is  composed  of,  or  at  least  represents,  two  elements: 
the  cost  of  production  and  the  cost  of  delivery;  and  olten  the  cost  of 
transportation  forms  a  large  part  of  the  commercial  value  of  the  product 
at  the  place  of  consumption.  Unfortunately  for  the  farmer  who  pro- 
duces the  Avheat  and  the  wool,  the  market  price  of  wheat  and  wool  is 
not  fixed  oy  the  cost  to  him  of  the  production  and  of  transportation, 
but  he  must  compete  in  the  foreign  market  with  the  wheat  and  wool 
growers  of  other  countries,  and  even  in  the  home  market  with  foreign 
wool.  He  can  not  control  the  cost  of  transportation.  He  must  be  con- 
tent to  receive  for  his  labor  and  the  use  of  his  capital  what  is  left  of 
the  selling  price  of  his  product  at  the  place  of  delivery  after  the  cost  of 
transportation  is  paid,  whether  it  is  fair  compensation  or  not.  Low 
rates  of  transportation  not  only  benefit  the  producer  and  the  consumer, 
but  stimulate  production,  develop  the  resources  of  the  country,  in- 
crease the  amount  of  transportation,  and  increase  the  individual  and 
aggregate  wealth  of  the  countrv. 


i 


38 

If  time  would  permit  I  could  show,  in  like  manner,  how  a  protective 
policy  which  stimulates  industry  and  gives  employment  to  labor  in 
manafactaring  pursuits  drawn  from  agriculture,  and  thus  lessens  com- 
petition to  the  farmer  and  at  the  same  time  furnishes  him  a  market  for 
his  surplus  products,  supplies  the  Government  with  revenues,  and  en- 
ables it  to  undertake  public  works  which  directly  and  indirectly  bene- 
fit the  farmer. 

Take  one  instance  more.  Once  the  Government  relied  to  a  great  ex- 
tent for  current  expenditures  upon  the  proceeds  of  sales  of  public  lands, 
and  then  the  object  ot  the  Government  in  disposing  of  the  lauds  was 
to  realize  as  much  revenue  as  possible  from  them.  But,  with  the  ad- 
vent of  the  Kepublican  party  to  power,  and  with  the  tariff  which  at 
once  started  the  country  upon  the  highway  of  prosperity  and  tilled 
the  public  Treasury,  the  policy  of  the  Government  has  been  changed, 
and  now  free  homes  upon  the  public  domain  are  given  to  all  citizens 
who  will  avail  themselves  of  the  gift 

HOW  SHOULD  THE  REVBXUB  BB  KEDOCKD? 

The  Kepublican  party  says  by  placing  articles  vvhich  we  do  not  pro- 
duce on  the  free-list,  by  repealing  the  tobacco  tax  and  tax  on  alcohol 
used  in  the  arts  and  reducing  the  tariff  on  sugar.  How  does  the  Demo- 
cratic party  propose  to  reduce  the  revenue?  The  revenue  of  the  Govern- 
ment is  principally  derived  from  duties  on  imports  and  from  internal- 
revenue  taxes.  The  total  annual  revenue  derived  from  these  sources 
is  something  over  $300,000,000.  Of  this  about  $212,000,000  is  derived 
from  duties  on  imports,  and  nearly  $100,000,000  from  internal-revenue 
taxes,  mainly  from  tobacco  and  spirits.  The  Democratic  party  does  not 
propose  to  remove  the  war  or  internal-revenue  taxes;  that  would  re- 
duce the  revenue  without  benefiting  British  manufacturers  and  with- 
out injuring  American  industry  or  removing  protection  to  the  Amer- 
ican laborer.  To  secure  votes  in  the  tobacco -growing  States  they  did 
yield  in  the  Mills  bill  to  the  demands  of  the  tobacco-planters  for  a 
reduction  of  taxes  on  tobacco  and  cigars.  But  they  propose  to  obtain 
the  principal  reduction  of  the  revenue  by  reduction  of  the  duties  upon 
imports,  not  upon  articles  which  we  do  not  produce  at  home,  but,  so 
iar  as  possible,  by  the  reduction  of  duties  upon  articles  which  our  own 
people  manufacture.  The  revenue  at  present  derived  from  tariflF  duties 
may  be  divided  as  foUo ws:  About  fifty-eight  millions  from  sugar,  nearly 
fifty  miUions  from  luxuries,  and  about  one  hundred  millions  from  man- 
ufactured articles,  woolens,  cotton  fabrics,  clothing,  steel,  and  various 
.  products  of  the  looms,  factories,  furnaces,  mills,  and  shops,  and  about 
twelve  millions  from  wha^  the  free-traders  term  raw  material.  Kaw 
materials  as  used  by  them  embraces  wool.  For  the  same  reason  that 
the  Democratic  party  does  not  propose  to  repeal  the  internal-revenue 
taxes,  namely,  that  the  repeal  of  such  taxes  would  not  permit  inter- 
ference with  the  manufacturing  interests  of  the  country,  they  propose 
to  retain  protection  to  the  sugar  industry.  They  say  that  the  sugar 
produced  in  the  United  States  is  so  small  a  portion  of  the  whole  amount 
oonsnmed  that  the  fact  that  the  price  of  the  domestic  product  is  in- 
creased by  the  amount  of  the  duty  on  imported  sugar  (which  is  not  ad- 
mitted) ia  not  objectionable  like  the  duty  upon  wool,  which,  collected 
on  a  hundred  millions  of  pounds  of  imported  wool,  increases  the  price 
also  of  three  hundred  millions  of  pounds  of  the  domestic  product. 

I'he  $50,000,000  received  from  duties  on  luxuries,  as  it  is  paid  alto- 
fether  by  the  rich,  all  parties  agree  must  not  be  touched.  This  leaves 
88  the  only  alternative  the  reduction  of  revenue  to  be  made  from  the 
$100,000,000  derived  from  manufactured  articles  and  from  raw  m»- 


„    000  611  327     8 
39 

terialB,  and  the  policy  of  the  party,  as  unequivocally  and  emphatically 
stated  in  President  Cleveland's  message  and  in  the  annual  reports  of 
the  Secretaries  of  the  Treasury  under  his  administration,  is  to  make  the 
necessary  reduction  of  the  revenue  in  this  direction.  If  this  policy 
should  be  carried  out,  v?hat  sources  of  revenue  would  be  left?  The 
internal-revenue  tax,  duty  on  sugar,  and  the  duty  on  luxuries,  that 
is  all. 

The  Democratic  policy  strikes  at  the  whole  system  of  protection  to 
American  industries,  threatens  the  destruction  of  our  American  man- 
ufactories and  the  prosperity  of  the  entire  North.  Is  it  any  wonder 
that  in  foreign  countries,  and  especially  in  England,  it  is  popular?  Why 
should  it  not  be?  It  is  the  policy  which  Great  Britain  has  advocated 
for  the  United  States  for  many  years,  which  she  endeavored  before  the 
Eevolution  to  enforce  in  the  colonies,  which  she  has  enforced  in  Ireland 
and  India,  where  she  has  the  power,  which  her  manufacturers  and  cap- 
italists have  spent  millions  of  dollars  to  promulgate  in  the  United  States, 
and  which  even  now  they  are  contributing  to  advance — a  policy  which, 
if  it  ever  prevails,  which  may  God  grant  it  may  not,  will  open  up  to 
the  manufacturers  of  England  the  markets  of  sixty-odd  millions  of  peo- 
ple, who  consume  more  of  the  products  of  labor  than  any  other  equal 
number  of  people  in  the  world. 

In  the  United  States  the  land  required  for  manufacturing  purposes, 
for  raising  agricultural  products,  the  buildings  and  other  improvements 
used  for  carrying  on  the  great  industries,  the  tools  and  machinery,  the 
profits  of  the  manufacturers  and  returns  for  the  capital  invested,  the 
savings  of  the  laborer,  whether  invested  in  a  house  or  placed  in  a  sav- 
ings-bank, or  loaned  on  bond  and  mortgage,  are  taxed,  and  bear  their 
proportion  of  the  public  burdens.  They  contribute  to  support  a  State 
government,  maintain  a  county  organization,  build  and  keep  in  repair 
highways,  to  support  municipal  governments,  and  to  support  schools. 
The  more  prosperous  the  business,  the  more  it  contributes. 

Home  industries,  diversified  labor,  increased  manufactured  products, 
all  help,  by  increasing  the  amount  and  value  of  taxable  property,  to 
bear  these  public  burdens  and  to  decrease  the  burden  to  be  laorne  by 
any  one  member  of  society.  The  duty  which  is  levied  upon  foreign 
products  at  the  custom-house  for  the  supj^ort  of  the  General  Govern- 
ment is  but  an  equivalent  for  the  State,  county,  city,  and  school  taxes 
levied  in  this  country  upon  the  plant  of  manufacturers  and  product  of 
labor.  What  is  proposed  by  the  free-trader  or  the  advocate  of  a  tariff 
for  revenue  only  ?  It  is  to  place  our  manufacturers  at  a  disadvantage 
with  the  foreign  manufacturers,  by  admitting  to  this  country  the  prod- 
ucts of  foreign  labor  untaxed  to  compete  with  the  products  of  domestic 
labor,  which  in  every  stage,  from  the  raw  material  to  the  fiiushed 
product,  has  in  some  manner  been  subject  to  taxation. 

But,  says  the  Democratic  party,  N 

BUY  WHEBE  YOU  CAN  BUY  CHEAPEST; 

obtain  what  you  consume  at  the  lowest  price,  no  matter  how  reached. 
The  greiit  argument  made  against  protection  is  that  we  shall  be  able 
with  free  trade  to  get  from  abroad  at  a  lower  cost  articles  which  we 
now  produce  for  ourselves  under  the  protection  of  the  tariff.  Once  re- 
move the  barrier  against  the  cheap-labor  products  of  foreign  countries 
which  has  been  erected  by  a  protective  tariff,  and,  as  surely  as  water 
seeks  its  level,  the  prices  in  the  United  States,  not  only  of  labor  prod- 
ucts but  of  labor  itself,  will  find  a  level  with  the  prices  of  those  com- 
modities in  the  countiies  where  they  are  cheapest. 
The  law  of  supply  and  demand  is  as  certain  as  the  laws  of  natoie. 

DOI.PH 


VCSB  LfBRARY 

1^  -Gc^n^o 


> 


40 

Let  ns  see  where  this  principle  of  buying  where  you  cAn  buy  cheapest 
would  lead  us.  There  is  scarcely  a  product  of  human  industry  that, 
owing  to  more  favorable  conditions  of  climate,  cheaper  lands,  or  cheaper 
labor,  can  not  be  produced  cheaper  in  some  portion  of  the  world  than 
in  the  United  States,  unless  we  are  willing  to  cheapen  labor  in  the 
United  States  to  the  standards  in  Europe  and  Asia.  To  buy  where  we 
can  buy  cheapest  would  be  to  buy  our  wool  of  Australia,  the  Argentine 
Republic,  Africa,  Asia,  and  Turkey;  our  woolen  fabrics  of  England 
and  Grermany;  our  cotton  fabrics  of  Great  Britain  and  other  European 
nations;  our  iron  and  steel  of  Great  Britain  and  Germany;  our  fish  of 
Canada;  in  a  word,  to  transfer  our  workshops  and  factories  across  the 
sea  to  give  employment  to  the  laborers  of  other  countries. 

The  enterprising  woolen  manufacturer  would  purchase  his  wool  of 
Australia  and  manufacture  it  in  China  with  Chinese  labor.  If  admit- 
ted duty  free,  clothing  manufactured  by  cheap  labor  under  the  opera- 
tion ot  the  ' '  sweating  system  ' '  in  Great  Britain  or  by  Chinese  labor  in 
China  could  be  purchased  cheaper  abroad  than  at  home.  Even  our 
wheat  would  eventually  be  purchased  from  India  and  our  great  agri- 
cultural interests  destroyed,  as  has  been  the  case  in  Great  Britain. 
However  broad  our  philanthropy  may  be,  however  much  we  may  sym- 
pathize with  the  laborers  of  other  countries,  charity  should  begin  at 
home. 

In  dealing  with  humanity  we  owe  our  first  duty  to  our  own  country 
and  our  own  countrymen.  It  is  the  duty  of  the  Government  to  protect 
its  citizens  in  the  enjoyment  of  their  rights  upon  land  and  sea  wherever 
they  may  rightfully  go.  This  duty  of  the  Government  is  but  the  cor- 
relative of  the  duty  of  the  citizen  of  allegiance  to  his  Government. 
Though  it  may  be  powerless  at  this  time  to  do  so,  it  is  the  duty  of  the 
Government  to  secure  to  every  citizen  of  the  Republic,  white  or  black,  on 
every  foot  of  American  soU,  civil  and  political  rights  which  the  Constitu- 
tion guaranties  to  him;  to  see  that  he  enjoys  rights  of  life,  liberty,  and 
the  pursuit  of  happiness ;  that  he  receives  the  fruit  of  his  own  labor ;  that 
when  he  has  a  right  to  vote  he  is  not  intimidated  or  driven  from  the 
polls,  and  when  he  has  voted  that  his  vote  shall  be  honestly  counted. 
So  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Government  to  protect  the  laboring  men  of  the 
United  States  against  the  cheap  labor  of  Asia  and  the  pauper  labor  of 
Europe,  to  dignify  labor,  and  to  secure  the  independence  and  to  promote 
the  intelligence  of  the  American  laborer;  to  protect  the  American  la- 
borer not  only  against  the  admission  into  this  country  of  laborers  who 
work  for  starvation  wages,  but  from  the  products  of  cheap  labor  every- 
where. The  Democratic  party  has  entirely  abandoned  the  principle  of 
protection  to  American  industries  and  to  American  labor.  Urged  on  by 
the  solid  South,  and  cheered  on  by  British  manufacturers  and  free- 
traders, the  Democratic  party  stands  to-day,  like  Samson  stood  in  the 
temple  of  the  Philistines,  with  its  arms  around  the  pillars  of  American 
industry,  blind,  waiting  only  for  strength  to  pull  down  the  great  struct- 
ure which  has  been  so  many  years  in  building,  and  which,  if  it  does 
fall,  will  bring  ruin  and  distress  upon  the  country,  and  will  grind  the 
Democratic  party  to  powder. 


